Chennai, Feb 16 A controversy has erupted at the Madras High Court after the All India Lawyers Association for Justice (AILAJ), Tirunelveli chapter, alleged that its name was misused in a fake complaint accusing a designated senior advocate of collecting Rs 50 lakh to bribe a sitting judge.
In a letter to the High Court’s Registrar General, S. Alli, AILAJ State Coordinator U. Adhiyaman categorically denied sending any communication to Justice M. Nirmal Kumar regarding the alleged bribery.
The association said it came to know about the purported letter only through newspaper reports dated February 15, 2026. “We have never sent any such letter to Justice Nirmal Kumar or to any authority. Our organisation is in no way connected with the alleged complaint,” Adhiyaman stated.
He further clarified that the Tamil Nadu State chapter of AILAJ is based in Tirunelveli and not at Thambu Chetty Street in Chennai, as mentioned in the fake letterhead. The association also noted that it does not have the post of “Secretary” as referred to in the forged document and functions only through State Coordinators.
Calling it a “malafide attempt to defame and malign” the organisation, AILAJ said it would lodge a separate police complaint over the misuse of its name and requested the Registrar General to initiate appropriate action.
The issue arose after Justice Nirmal Kumar received a letter dated January 12, 2026, allegedly from AILAJ, claiming that a senior advocate had collected Rs 50 lakh from two litigants, purportedly to secure favourable orders in two connected cases. The letter even urged the judge to either pass suitable orders or initiate action in the matter.
Copies were marked to the Union Ministry of Law and Justice and the CBI headquarters in New Delhi.
The Ministry forwarded the complaint to the High Court Registry, which placed it before Justice Kumar.
The senior advocate concerned denied the allegations and expressed willingness to cooperate with any inquiry.
The CBI’s Special Public Prosecutor K. Srinivasan also urged strict action against those behind the false representation.
Subsequently, Justice Kumar recused himself from hearing the cases and ordered a vigilance inquiry into the matter.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor