Supreme Court Issues Notice on BCI Appeal Against Kerala HC Ruling That State Bar Council Lacked Power To Continue Disciplinary Action After March 2024

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on an appeal filed by the Bar Council of India challenging the Kerala High Court judgment which held that the Kerala Bar Council cannot continue disciplinary proceedings after May 6, 2024 during its extended term. The High Court had concluded that, in the absence of a duly constituted council, the disciplinary proceedings initiated against Kerala High Court Advocates' Association President Yeshwanth Shenoy could not be sustained in law.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice.

Shenoy is currently the President of Kerala High Court Advocates Association. The dispute stems from allegations made by former Kerala High Court judge Mary Joseph, who complained that Shenoy shouted at and harassed her during court proceedings and stated that he would see that the Judge was expelled from the seat.

Based on the Judge's letter, the Bar Council of Kerala initiated proceedings alleging violation of Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette. In March 2023, suo motu criminal contempt proceedings were also initiated against Shenoy by the High Court, which a Division Bench closed last year, observing that correct procedure was not followed in initiating the contempt.

Shenoy challenged the Bar Council's show cause notice dated February 14, 2023, arguing that if the action was based on a complaint, the Council could not have treated it as a suo motu proceeding. He also claimed that the complaint was not in the prescribed format.

The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition and permitted the State Bar Council to continue disciplinary proceedings.

On June 20, 2025, the Division Bench set aside the Single Judge's order and quashed the show cause notice. It held that the proceedings were not suo motu as the record showed reliance on a complaint dated February 9, 2023.

The Division Bench further held that the Bar Council of Kerala lacked jurisdiction to proceed after May 6, 2024, when the extended term of its elected body expired, and that disciplinary powers could not continue in the absence of a Special Committee under Section 8A of the Advocates Act.

It rejected BCI's reliance on Rule 32 of the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015, holding that it permitted only continuation of the verification process. It also noted that dismissal of the contempt case meant the same allegations could not be pursued again.

BCI's review petition was dismissed on October 17, 2025. The High Court held that none of the grounds under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC were made out, that no error apparent on the face of the record was shown.

Thuss, BCI has filed the present petition challenging both orders of the High Court.

Case no. – Diary No. 62809 / 2025

Case Title – Bar Council of India v. Yeshwanth Shenoy 

Click Here To Read/Download Order