Back
ATUL SREEDHARAN
Shahid Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Atul Sreedharan, J. - Today also the lawyers are abstaining from appearing before the Court on, yet another call given by the Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council.
2. The strike has been going on since the 23rd of March, 2023 on an issue that could have been resolved on the basis of consultation with the Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh. On 24/03/2023, a Division Bench headed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice and Hon'ble Justice Vishal Mishra passed an elaborate order in W.P. No. 7295/2023 (In reference [Suo Moto] Vs. Chairman, State Bar Council of M.P & Ors.). In paragraph 4, the Ld. DB referred to the lack of support from the Bar Council of India and also referred to its direction in the letter dated 23/03/23 which asked the State Bar Council to withdraw the call for abstinence from work. However, despite the said letter of the BCI, the Chairman and members of the State Bar Council have enforced the call for strike.
3. In paragraph 9 of the aforementioned order, the Ld. DB has copiously referred to paragraph 19, 20 and 21 of the judgement passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 8078 of 2018 (Praveen Pandey Vs. State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh) wherein this Court had held that th
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State Bar Council's call for strike was illegal and unconstitutional, and lawyers have no right to go on strike or give a call for boycott....
Disobedience of court orders by advocates constitutes grounds for contempt, leading to potential consequences including dismissal of appeals for lack of prosecution.
The call to abstain from court work by the Bar Council violates statutory rights and Supreme Court directives.
Lawyers have a duty to ensure the smooth functioning of the court and cannot disrupt court proceedings. Strikes interfere with the administration of justice and are against the duty of lawyers as off....
Lawyers have no right to strike, as established by the Supreme Court, and any such action will be treated as criminal contempt.
Lawyers have a duty to attend trial, and strikes interfere with the administration of justice. Courts are obligated to hear and decide cases, and lawyers have no right to go on strike or give a call ....
The court's trust in the Bar Council's commitment to address the issue of strike calls and the direction to the State to provide up-to-date information on the availability of judicial officers.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
