'Such Incidents Of Browbeating Are Increasing & Must Be Stopped': Supreme Court On Lawyer Misbehaving Before High Court

While hearing a plea filed by a lawyer against whom contempt proceedings were initiated by High Court for misbehaving in court room, Supreme Court has allowed the lawyer to file an undertaking with unconditional apology that such an incident shall not occur at his instance in future. The Bench will hear the matter again on 13th December.

A Bench comprising Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna however made strong remarks against such behaviour and observed that such incidents of browbeating are increasing and must be stopped.

"Whatever has happened before the High Court for which the contempt proceedings are ordered is very unfortunate. Such incidents of browbeating are increasing. It must be stopped." a bench headed by Justice Shah said.

In the present matter, the High Court of Uttarakhand had passed an order on 22 August, 2019, referring the matter to the Bar Council of Uttarakhand for taking a disciplinary action against the petitioner, for misbehaving with the Court. 

The Bench had directed the Bar Council to take disciplinary action against the counsel and respond back to the Court for the action taken thereafter.

Thereafter, a Recall Application had been filed by the counsel in which, the grounds taken for recall was that on the date when the incident of misbehaviour occurred, he was ailing and unable to argue the case and that is why he submitted that the Court may pass an appropriate order as Court is not hearing him.

The High Court refused to accept his explanation saying that on the same day, there was another case of the counsel, which was listed and he had argued the same.

"It is highly impresumable that after couple of cases thereafter, he made such a statement that the Court may proceed to pass whatever order the Court feels like because the Court is not willing to hear him." the High Court had noted.

While observing that an apology itself amounts to an admission of the incident, the Bench had further stated that a person who can venture out to humiliate the Court by the language used in the proceedings of the Court is contemptuous.

Refusing to accept the reasons and explanation given by the petitioner, the High Court had rejected his recall Application. The Bench had also issued a direction to the Bar Council of Uttarakhand to report back to the Court as to what action they have taken in pursuance to their order.