‘Madhu Barrister Would Have Hanged His Head In Shame’: Orissa HC Criticizes Conduct Of Striking Lawyers Of Sambalpur, Grants Bail

The Orissa High Court has heavily criticized the unruly conducts of striking lawyers of Sambalpur while they staged a violent protest in December last year with a demand to establish a permanent Bench of the High Court in the western part of the State. While granting bail to Sureswar Mishra, the President of District Bar Association, Sambalpur and 28 other lawyers, a Single Judge Bench of Justice V. Narasingh has expressed its serious dismay over the alleged violent activities of the lawyers which caused irreparable damage to the justice delivery system as a whole. It sorrily observed, “By their conduct, there is no iota of doubt that the petitioners have undermined the majesty and dignity of the Court and unabashedly put the Presiding Officers and Staff of the Court, even forgetting that there are also lady officers and staff to mortal fear of their life and limb. It is by sheer providence that the judicial officers and staff of the Court did not suffer any serious injury.” The High Court was hearing the bail applications of lawyers, including that of Sambalpur Bar Association President Sureswar Mishra, who were arrested in the aftermath of violent protests in the district of Sambalpur which was convened in the name of ‘Satyagraha’ on 12th December, 2022. They were accused of vandalising public properties inside the Courtrooms and manhandling judicial officers and Court staff. It was argued on behalf of the petitioners that there was no premeditation and it was merely a mob fury and was an expression of collective anger at the disappointment of legitimate local aspirations being not redressed. It was also submitted that they were swayed away by momentary anger but they have no criminal proclivity and thus, they deserve to be released on bail. On the other side, it was argued for the State that there are materials on record to indicate that the petitioners chose to take the law into their hands. They not only caused damage to the property of the Court but also manhandled judicial officers and staff. It was further submitted that by their overt act the petitioners undermined the rule of law. Before considering merits of the aforesaid submissions, Justice Narasingh reminded the petitioners of their duty as lawyers by quoting the following immortal words of legendary Constitutional expert and former Advocate General of Maharashtra Hormasji Maneckji Seervai: “Lawyers ought to know that at least as long as lawful redress is available to aggrieved lawyers, there is no justification for lawyers to join in an illegal conspiracy to commit a gross, criminal contempt of court, thereby striking at the heart of the liberty conferred on every person by our Constitution. Strike is an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice. The principle is that those who have duties to discharge in a court of justice are protected by the law and are shielded by the law to discharge those duties, the advocates in return have duty to protect the courts….” He went ahead to remind the unruly lawyers of the high-values held by the first Barrister of Odisha Utkal Gouraba Madhusudan Das and said, “Birthday of grand old man of Odisha (Kula Brudha) Madhusudan Das popularly known as Madhu Barrister is celebrated every year in this State on 28th of April as “Lawyers Day”. He would have hanged his head in shame and despair knowing that the petitioners-advocates, whose licenses to practice have been suspended by the Bar Council of India, are accused of vandalizing the temple of justice.” The Court said that the lawyers are an integral part of the justice delivery system. They are the ‘bridge’ between the justice seekers and courts. “Not for nothing, they are referred to as officers of the Court. The alleged conduct of the petitioners is deplorable to say the least. The manner in which they have conducted themselves shocks the conscience of this Court. However, it is the majesty of law reigning supreme that mandates, to treat all accused with an even hand notwithstanding their alleged conduct,” the Court added. The Single Bench rejected the submission on behalf of the petitioners that their act was an instance of “more sinned against the sinning” as the overt acts were clearly borne out from the statements of judicial officers working in the district of Sambalpur, who had to bear the raze of protesting lawyers on the fateful day. “It is the obligation of all concerned with the justice delivery system, to uphold the dignity of the Court which was unfortunately forgotten by the Petitioners and hopefully momentarily,” the Court reverberated. Though the Court was deeply anguished by the aforesaid conduct of lawyers, keeping in view the period of custody, filing of charge sheet, it directed the petitioners to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the Court in seisin. Additionally, it enlisted the following conditions...

‘Madhu Barrister Would Have Hanged His Head In Shame’: Orissa HC Criticizes Conduct Of Striking Lawyers Of Sambalpur, Grants Bail

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

‘Madhu Barrister Would Have Hanged His Head In Shame’: Orissa HC Criticizes Conduct Of Striking Lawyers Of Sambalpur, Grants Bail

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers