Right To Practise Law Is A Fundamental Right, Bar Associations Not Empowered To Restrain Lawyers From Appearing Before Any Court: Madras HC
The Madras High Court recently observed that a bar association was not empowered to restrict a lawyer from appearing in court. The court observed that the right to practice law was a fundamental right and such a right could not be taken away by the Bar Association by suspending lawyers. “The Bar Association is not empowered to prevent or restrain any Advocate from appearing before...
The Madras High Court recently observed that a bar association was not empowered to restrict a lawyer from appearing in court. The court observed that the right to practice law was a fundamental right and such a right could not be taken away by the Bar Association by suspending lawyers.
“The Bar Association is not empowered to prevent or restrain any Advocate from appearing before the Courts. Practice of Law is a fundamental right enunciated under the Constitution. Advocates Act also provides right to Lawyers to practice before all the Courts. Such right cannot be taken away by merely suspending a Member of the Bar Association or causing inconvenience to him from practising Law in Court premises,” the court observed.
The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan further added that an advocate was expected to maintain a cordial relationship with the members of the Bar Association to ensure that the court proceedings are not obstructed.
The court hearing a petition by Advocate Senthil against the order of the Tambaram Bar Association suspending him. Senthil submitted that he was suspended merely because he attended the court contrary to the decision of the Bar Association to not attend court proceedings.
The petition was opposed by the Bar Association which informed the court that Senthil had abused members of the Bar Association and was frequently causing inconvenience to the members of the Bar Association. The association also denied the allegation of preventing lawyers from attending court proceedings.
The court noted that even the Apex Court had observed that boycotts should be used as a last resort by the Bar Association and there could not be continuous boycotts by lawyers affecting the rights of litigants and the justice delivery system.
The court observed that the order passed by the Tambaram Bar Association was unnecessary and such an attempt should be avoided. The court added that the members of the bar association were expected to respect the freedom of speech and practice of others.
Thus, the court allowed the petition and quashed the bar Association's order.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr.G.Karthikeyan Senior Counsel for Mrs.A.Jagadeeswari
Counsel for Respondents: Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar, Mr.P.Santhaseelan
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 315
Case Title: V Senthil v The Secretary, Bar Council of TN & Puducherry
Case No: W.P.No.20133 of 2024