The Gujarat High Court recently deprecated the conduct of a senior advocate, noting that during the dictation of the order he tried to inappropriately pressurize the court and had aggressively said that the "court does not have time" to hear him, observing that it amounted to an "attempt to browbeat the court". [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 310]

On the senior counsel's conduct the court said that he had attempted to create an impression that the Court is not discharging its duties or taking any steps in deciding the matter.

The court made the observations while refusing regular bail to an accused booked in a POCSO case. For context, the court in its November 3 order had noted that it had heard submissions by the petitioner's counsel as well as the State and had said that it did not find any substance in the petitioner's submissions.

At that stage, the order notes, the senior counsel appearing for petitioner had sought time to make further submissions. To this the court had lamented the state of affairs noting that once the matter is called out and taken up for hearing after investing time when the Court is going to pass an order, the applicant's counsel had sought time.

In the November 3 order the court had directed the Registry to download or preserve the live-streaming recording of the proceedings concerning the apprehension of the Senior Counsel as regards him not being given ample opportunity to present his case.

Thereafter, Justice Hasmukh D Suthar in his November 5 order said that it is the pious duty and obligation of Bar and Bench to uphold dignity of Courts and Majesty of Law with all due respect and honour to the Bar.

The court said that on November 3, a 170 matters were listed for hearing, out of which the Court took up 156 matters and disposed of 71. It said that the matter where the senior advocate was appearing in was taken up and the Court extended its time to hear the oral submissions of the Senior Advocate and after hearing him, the Court called upon the Assistant Public Prosecutor and the advocate for the original complainant to make submissions.

It said:

"Even though the Court hours got over and the Bench explicitly indicated that it was not inclined to accept the submissions on behalf of the applicant qua penetration, DNA report and potency of applicant, learned Senior Advocate Mr. I.H. Syed kept on aggressively insisting the Court to allow him to make his oral arguments. Despite the Court has been pleased to grant liberty to file brief synopsis considering heavy board and heavy work load due to ensuing Diwali vacation, only with a view to save judicial time, learned Senior Advocate engaged in persistent redundancy, making repetitive submissions and insisted to read over statements as if he is conducting a final hearing of conviction appeal rather than arguing a bail matter.

While the Court was in the process of dictating its order and the Court Usher was standing on the Dias nearby The chair as the session drew to a close, at that time the learned Senior Advocate attempted to inappropriately pressurized and tried to dictate the schedule of the Court. He explicitly and aggressively uttered to the Court while the Court was dictating the order, “Write down Sir ! Court does not have time” (“Lakhi do Saaheb Court pase time Nathi”). This utterance, alongside his affront posture, amounts to an attempt to browbeat the Court and he tried to reprimand the Court over its Court time management and dictated Court scheduling it. Such conduct is not highly contemptuous but unbefitting to a Designated Senior Advocate".

The court said that at the time of the incident, several other advocates and litigants were waiting patiently in the courtroom for their turn and by persistently to keep on repeating arguments is nothing but amounts to wasting precious judicial time.

The court said that the senior advocate demonstrated a "total lack of professional courtesy, collegiality, and brotherhood" within the legal fraternity by completely disregarding the presence of his fellow members of the Bar also.

Further, the court said, that this incident on November 3 is "not an isolated event". It said that the court had previously ignored such tactics of the senior lawyer extended magnanimity in the interest of institutional harmony; however, this leniency has only encouraged and boost up such behaviour.

"Notably, a Coordinate Bench of this Court had previously passed a strict order regarding the learned Senior Advocate's conduct in a group of petitions being SCA No.7311 of 2025 and allied matters on 23.05.2025. On that occasion, the learned Senior Advocate Mr. I.H. Syed tendered an unconditional apology, which the Court had accepted. Even, in the order dated 24.06.2026 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.3129/2026, this Court has taken note in paras [5.6], [6.0] and [7.0] and in para [9.8] of judgment dated 22.08.2025 passed in SCR.A No.13245 of 2024 wherein learned Senior Advocate Mr. I.H. Syed appeared. Despite that, there has been no improvement in his professional demeanour. The learned Senior Advocate continues to use these tactics to compel the Court to either adjourn matters or pass desired orders," the high court observed.

It said that a counsel's primary duty is to act as an Officer of the Court ensuring that the administration of justice prevails. It said that an advocate must act in a dignified manner and maintain a respectful attitude towards the Court. Further, the court said, designated Senior Advocates hold a privileged status and i legally expected to serve as a role model for the Bar, protecting the dignity of the institution rather than treating advocacy as a result-oriented venture.

It thus asked the Registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice for consideration along with order dated 03.11.2026 passed in present application as well as transcript of live-streaming of the case dated 03.11.2026, to initiate appropriate proceedings under Rule 7 of the High Court of Gujarat (Designation of Senior Advocates) Rules, 2025 in the event of any recurrence of such type of incident by the learned Senior Advocate Mr. I.H. Syed before any Court in future.

"Nevertheless, this Court considers it appropriate to extend one more chance to the learned Senior Advocate, with the hope and with the expectation that henceforth learned Senior Advocate Mr. I.H. Syed will abide by the Rules regulating the practice of Senior Advocate and would not show intolerance or indecorous behaviour before any Court. Let, copy of this order be sent to the Registrar General alongwith copy of order dated 03.11.2026 passed in present application with transcript / live-streaming of hearing dated 03.11.2026, order dated 23.05.2025 passed by the coordinate Bench in SCA No.7311 of 2025 and allied matters," the court added.