Supreme Court Stays MP High Court's Contempt Proceedings Against Bar Council Members Over Lawyers' Strike

The Supreme Court on Monday (April 26) stayed the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court for continuing criminal contempt proceedings against the Chairman and members of the State's Bar Council and several District Bar Associations. The petitioners contended that the High Court continued the contempt proceedings against them despite tendering an unconditional apology. 

The bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud issued notice in the matter and directed a stay on the impugned interim order. The MP Bar Council was represented by Senior Advocate Vivek Tankha along with Mr Varun Tankha and AOR Sumeer Sodhi. 

" Contempt notices have been issued to the Chairman and Member of the MP Bar Council and 103 District Bar Associations. Learned Senior Counsel submits that though proceedings were dropped against the individual members, the High Court has proceeded with criminal contempt proceedings. Each of the petitioners has already tendered an unconditional apology and is ready to tender an unconditional apology to this Court. Issue notice, returnable on July (2nd week). Pending further orders there shall be a stay on criminal contempt proceedings." 

The SLP filed by Mr Prem Singh Bhadoriya, Chairman of the Madhya Pradesh Bar Council challenges the interim order passed by the High Court (Jabalpur Branch) bench comprising Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra. As per the impugned order, the High Court dropped the show cause notices for initiation of contempt proceedings to individual lawyers (1938 cases)  as well as the contempt proceedings which were initiated against individual lawyers (2624 cases) for violation of the directions issued against the state-wide lawyers' strike and absentation from work. 

However, the impugned order continued the pendency of 176 criminal contempt proceedings against the chairman and office bearers of the MP Bar Council and other Bar Associations in light of the Bar Council's call for a state-wide strike on March 23, 2023. The petitioners are aggrieved that the contempt proceedings have not been dropped against them despite tendering an unconditional and unqualified apology. 

As per the grounds stated in the SLP, the Petitioners have already tendered an unconditional apology to the High Court and are willing to tender another apology before the Apex Court. The petitioners urge that the present proceedings be dropped considering the constant humiliation it causes to the members of the Bar Council. It was also pointed out that the reason for which the strike was initiated was in relation to a scheme of the High Court which was later modified and issues relating to it were also resolved.  

It is further contended that no ingredient of ' Wilful Disobedience' was made out in the present scenario as "(1) the strike called on 24.02.2023 was called off immediately when the Hon'ble High Court assured the State Bar Council of consultation and reconsideration; (2) On 28.03.2023, the strike was called off immediately when this Hon'ble Court (Supreme Court) intervened to resolve the matter; (3) The State Bar Council through representations dated 28.03.2023 and 06.04.2023 promptly assisted the Hon'ble High Court by forwarding suggestions (on modification of the scheme) as called for by the Hon'ble High Court." 

Background: Why Was The Stike Initiated? 

A large number of Advocates of Madhya Pradesh had gone on strike against a policy of the administration of the High Court to dispose of long-pending cases in district courts. The advocates are protesting against the 25 Debt Scheme introduced by the High Court in October 2021 to tackle the issue of old cases which have been pending for many years and have not been taken up. As per this policy, district courts are required to identify and dispose of the 25 oldest cases in each court quarterly (in 66 days). 

By a letter dated 20th March, the Chairman of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh addressed a communication to the Chief Justice to the effect that unless the scheme relating to the disposal of 25 identified cases in every quarter is not withdrawn by 22nd March they would protest. Furthermore, it was stated in the communication that a general body meeting was held on 18th March and it was unanimously resolved that if the High Court does not withdraw the scheme pertaining to the disposal of the 25 oldest cases up to 22nd March, all the lawyers in the State would collectively protest and will abstain from judicial work w.e.f. 23rd March. 

The Chief Justice has communicated to the Chairman and the members of the Bar Council that they could submit the issues being faced by them; so that they can be considered and resolved.

The Bar Council of India had also directed the State Bar Council to take steps for withdrawal of the call for strike immediately by the Bar Council as well as by the Bar Associations of the State. 

On March 28, 2023, the Supreme Court allowed the State Bar Council to raise their grievance before them and a meeting was scheduled on 29th March 2023. Though earlier communication was made to continue abstention from work on 29th March 2023, but same was called off and all the Advocates were requested to appear before respective courts on 29th March 2023. These suggestions were also considered by the MP High Court and the concerned scheme was modified on May 8, 2023  taking into account the challenges faced by the lawyers. 

However from September 2023 onwards numerous contempt cases and show causes were initiated against the members of the State Bar Council and individual lawyers who agreed to the call for strike. 

Case Details : THE CHAIRMAN, STATE BAR COUNCIL OF MADHYA PRADESH vs. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Diary No.- 17447 - 2024 

Click Here To Read/Download Order