'No Lawyer Can Brazenly Say I Won't Argue The Matter' : Supreme Court Asks Advocate To Tender Apology To High Court
The Supreme Court recently chastised an advocate for refusing to argue an appeal before the High Court.The bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Augustine George Masih was hearing a petition filed by a convict, who is serving life sentence in a murder case, challenging the Allahabad High Court's refusal to grant him bail. When the bail application was taken, the High Court bench told the...
The Supreme Court recently chastised an advocate for refusing to argue an appeal before the High Court.
The bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Augustine George Masih was hearing a petition filed by a convict, who is serving life sentence in a murder case, challenging the Allahabad High Court's refusal to grant him bail. When the bail application was taken, the High Court bench told the counsel that it was ready to finally hear the appeal itself. However, the counsel refused to argue the appeal and insisted that the High Court should hear the bail application instead.
While dismissing the application, the High Court recorded as follows :
"Paper book is ready and the Court has invited learned counsel for the applicant to argue the case on merit in near future (on any Monday or Friday) but learned counsel for the applicant has declined to do so and has insisted the Court to decide the third bail application of the applicant Yogendra Yadav."
When the special leave petition challenging the High Court's order, Justice Oka said :
“The lawyer can say that alright, I will not be ready within one week, two weeks...but no lawyer can brazenly say that I will not argue the matter finally...There is a way of telling the court."
Though the bench agreed to issue notice on the petition, it said that the lawyer and the petitioner has to tender an apology to the High Court. The court added that unless an apology along with an application is tendered before the high court, they will not pass any further orders on the special leave petition pending before the Supreme Court.
The order stated :
“We don't appreciate such brazen conduct on the part of the appellant and his advocate. Though we are issuing notice, we make it clear that no further order will be passed on the SLP unless the petitioner puts on record an affidavit of apology of his as well as the affidavit of apology of his advocate.
We make it clear that the affidavits of apology shall be tendered before the High Court along with an application."
Case details: Yogendra Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Diary No. 32414-2024