The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay contempt proceedings against members of legal fraternity on strike in Odisha saying they wanted to know whether their profuse apology was “from the heart” or to escape the wrath of the Court.
Dealing with an application filed by lawyers to be relieved of the contempt proceedings initiated at the behest of the Orissa high court, a bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Manoj Misra said, “It is too early in the day to do that. We would like to see if the apology comes from the heart or it is simply to get out of these proceedings.”
The Court had in December initiated contempt proceedings against members of 20 district bar associations in Odisha who indulged in vandalism over establishing regional high court benches among other demands.
Also Read: Striking lawyers don’t deserve any protection, says top court
The action of the lawyers had brought the functioning of courts to a standstill.
Commenting on their action, the bench said, “Every year district courts remain shut most of the time due to your actions. Where will the litigants go...They suffer because of you.”
{{/usCountry}}Commenting on their action, the bench said, “Every year district courts remain shut most of the time due to your actions. Where will the litigants go...They suffer because of you.”
{{/usCountry}}Senior advocates VIjay Hansaria and Vikas Singh appearing for the lawyers told the Court that the apology expressed by lawyers should be accepted as they are conscious of their wrongdoing.
Singh further informed that due to the order of the top court, the lawyers are not getting bail and have even been stripped of their right to practice by the Bar Council of India (BCI).
The Court clarified that its order will not come in the way of the courts deciding upon the bail applications of the concerned lawyers.
As regards the disciplinary proceedings initiated by BCI against the erring lawyers, the bench said, “We clarify pendency of contempt before this Court does not mean that the BCI is impeded from going ahead with disciplinary proceedings.”
The Court felt that the demands raised by the lawyers had lost steam with the recent initiative of the Orissa HC to allow video conferencing facility for lawyers to appear in high court from 10 districts.
The bench noted this to be a “salutary effort” and urged the judicial forums, tribunals, district courts and high courts in the country to utilize this infrastructure to the best of their ability.