Jahanvi Agarwal
On 12th September 2023, the Supreme Court issued a notice to a Bar Association in Odisha for abstaining from a day of court work due to the death of one of its members. The Raigarh Bar Association’s decision was criticized by the court, which stated that while the death of a lawyer is a tragic occurrence, it cannot be used as justification for halting judicial work.
The bench, which comprised of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhuliawas, was hearing contempt proceedings brought against lawyers who had indulged in vandalism on the court premises during their strike in Odisha last year.
In a previous hearing, the Court showed its displeasure with the Odisha Bar Association’s custom of suspending judicial work for the entire day in order to pay respects to a deceased lawyer.
Justice Kaul stated that:
“Let them come and say that they will not do this in the future.”
The Contemnors were also given one more chance by the Court to submit their affidavit. It said that people would need to appear in person before the court if their affidavit wasn’t filed within two weeks.
One of the lawyers brought up the recent strike that occurred in the Allahabad High Court last week in protest of the police assault on lawyers in Hapur during the hearing.
Justice Kaul replied, “If it comes before us, we will deal with it in the same way.”
The Orissa High Court Bench Extension Strike by the Central Action Committee of All Bar Associations served as the impetus for the current contempt proceedings. As soon as the supporters started using violence, the excitement quickly became out of control.
According to the Court ruling, all officer bearers of the Bar Associations who took part in the strike and used violence, will receive letters of contempt.
It is important to note that the event occurred even after the Supreme Court issued its ruling in 2022, in which the court directly cautioned the protesting lawyers to get back to work or face contempt action and suspension of license. Therein, the Bench remarked reproachfully that the strike cost the subordinate courts 2,14,176 judicial working hours between January 1 and September 30, 2022.
The effect, according to Justice Kaul, “was to practically bring the working of the judicial system to a standstill, jeopardising the litigating public.”
In its last hearing, the Court noted that out of the 190 lawyers to whom the Apex Court had issued notice, 33 are yet to file their affidavit.
The NDOH for the said matter has been scheduled for 07.11.2023.
The Supreme Court has issued repeated directions against lawyer’s strikes.
Case Name: M/s. PLR Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. Mahanadi Coalfields Limited And Ors.
Diary Number: 33859/2022
Bench: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia