SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 534

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S., JJ
ABDULLA. H. NAUSHAD – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT – Respondent
WA 1571/2024



Advocates:
SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, SMT.PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN, SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE, SRI.ASHOK MENON, SRI.MAHESH SANKARASUBBAN SAHASRANAMAN, SRI.DEEPU THANKAN, SMT.VINEETHA BOSE, SMT.CINDIA S., SMT.GAYATHRI G., SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR, SRI.V.SREEJITH, SRI.MANSOOR.B.H., SMT.SAKEENA BEEGUM, K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI, SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI, P.K.PRIYA

IMPORTANT POINT
Lawyers cannot engage in strikes or boycotts, as such actions are illegal and undermine the justice system.

Headnote:

(A) Legal Profession - Calls for Boycott - The court addressed the absence of counsel due to a boycott call by the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association, deeming it illegal and a breach of decorum. The court emphasized that lawyers cannot strike or boycott court proceedings, referencing Supreme Court decisions. (Paras 2 - 4 )

(B) Contempt of Court - The court reiterated that strikes by lawyers violate established law and may lead to contempt proceedings against those who call for such actions. (Paras 3 - 4 )

Facts of the case:

The matters were dismissed for default due to the absence of counsel, attributed to a boycott call regarding court fees.

Findings of Court:

The court dismissed the cases without prejudice, allowing for restoration upon showing sufficient cause.

Issues: The main issue was the legality of the boycott call and its implications on justice.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that calls for boycotts by lawyers are illegal and undermine the justice system, emphasizing the duty of courts to proceed with cases regardless of lawyer absences.

Result: Cases dismissed for default.

JUDGMENT :

A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

All these matters stand dismissed for default for non-appearance of counsel representing the appellant/petitioner when the matters were called.

2. Noticing the number of matters in respect of which counsel were not present in Court today, we inquired with the learned Government Pleaders who were in court, as regards the reasons for such en masse absence of counsel. We were then told that it was probably on account of a call for boycott by the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association that the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner are not present in court today. We have also been shown a copy of a letter stated to have been written by the President of the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice informing him of the call for a pen down protest by lawyers on 09.04.2025 (today). While the letter in itself is distasteful as regards its contents, it also manifests a serious breach of the decorum that is expected to be maintained in this hallowed institution. Letters addressed by an Association of Advocates to the Chief Justice of the High Court cannot take the form of gratuitous sermons interspersed with veiled threats. Further, the call to lawyers to boycott courts on an issue concerning enhancement of court fees by the State government cannot be seen as anything but illegal and preposterous. This is more so when we are given to understand that a Public Interest Litigation on the same issue was moved, and is currently pending consideration, before the Chief Justice's Court.

3. As Judges we cannot be party to such calls for boycott that are antithetical to the concept of justice dispensation and have been declared as illegal by the Supreme Court on many an occasion. We might usefully remind the members of the legal fraternity of the decision of the Supreme Court in Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India and Another – [(2003) 2 SCC 45] where in the context of examining the legality and propriety of calls for strikes/boycotts by lawyers it was observed:

“[L]awyers have no right to go on strike or give a call for boycott, not even on a token strike. The protest, if any is required, can only be by giving press statements, TV interviews, carrying out of court premises banners and/or placards, wearing black or white or any colour armbands, peaceful protest marches outside and away from court premises, going on dharnas or relay fasts etc. Lawyers holding vakalats on behalf of their clients cannot not attend courts in pursuance to a call for strike or boycott. All lawyers must boldly refuse to abide by any call for strike or boycott. No lawyer can be visited with any adverse consequences by the Association or the Council and no threat or coercion of any nature including that of expulsion can be held out. No Bar Council or Bar Association can permit calling of a meeting for purposes of considering a call for strike or boycott and requisition, if any, for such meeting must be ignored. Only in the rarest of rare cases where the dignity, integrity and independence of the Bar and/or the Bench are at stake, courts may ignore (turn a blind eye) to a protest abstention from work for not more than one day. However, it will be for the court to decide whether or not the issue involves dignity or integrity or independence of the Bar and/or the Bench. Therefore in such cases the President of the Bar must first consult the Chief Justice or the District Judge before Advocates decide to absent themselves from court. The decision of the Chief Justice or the District Judge would be final and have to be abided by the Bar. The courts are under no obligation to adjourn matters because lawyers are on strike. On the contrary, it is the duty of all courts to go on with matters on their boards even in the absence of lawyers. In other words, courts must not be privy to strikes or calls for boycotts. If a lawyer, holding a vakalat of a client, abstains from attending court due to a strike ca

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top