Arumugam v. The Attorney General and Another – sllr 1992 volume 1 page 138

In the case between Arumugam (petitioner) and the Attorney General and Another (respondents), the court addressed the issue of whether sufficient and credible evidence existed to establish that the petitioner’s character had been rehabilitated to warrant re-admission to the roll of Attorneys-at-Law following prior removal due to serious professional misconduct. It was held that the petitioner failed to provide the strict proof required to demonstrate expiation of earlier misappropriation and a sustained period of good conduct. The decision reaffirmed the principle that re-enrolment to legal practice after misconduct requires clear, cogent, and unequivocal evidence of reformed character assessed over an adequate duration. The ruling applied relevant judicial precedents mandating rigorous sc