In a recent legal development in Madhya Pradesh High Court the Chairman of the Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council, Shri Prem Singh Bhadoriya, requested the court for the withdrawal of his counter affidavit and subsequently apologized for the mode adopted in calling for a strike. The order accepting the affidavit was recalled, and the Chairman withdrew the counter affidavit.

The controversy arose when the State Bar Council's call for a strike led to show cause notices and contempt proceedings against individual lawyers. The High Court Bar Association, Jabalpur, and the High Court Advocates' Bar Association, Jabalpur, filed affidavits explaining their adherence to the Bar Council's directives, citing potential risks to their livelihoods.

The court noted that 2624 contempt petitions and 1938 show cause notices were issued against advocates, and 176 criminal contempt cases were registered against office bearers. The court decided to address the petitions from the bar associations first and consider proceedings against Bar Council members later.

The affidavits from the bar associations highlighted their predicament, caught between complying with the court order and the Bar Council's directives. Both associations tendered unconditional apologies, with the Presidents taking responsibility if contempt was found.

The court acknowledged the gravity of disobeying judicial orders and emphasized the importance of maintaining the dignity and decorum of the court. Despite the violation of court orders, the court observed that there was no deliberate disobedience, considering the advocates' realization of their error.

In a significant decision, the court dropped all contempt proceedings against individual lawyers, emphasizing the absence of intentional disobedience. The court clarified that no contempt case had been registered against any advocate in this context.

The decision commended the efforts of the bar association leaders who, in filing affidavits, prioritized the interests of individual lawyers over their own positions. The court directed the registry to retain a copy of the order in each file and dispose of the contempt petitions, reserving the criminal contempt proceedings for later consideration. The main matters were scheduled for review before the concerned benches, and a follow-up hearing was set after four weeks for criminal contempt proceedings.

CASE: IN REFERENCE (SUO MOTO) Vs. THE CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS,

WP No. 7295 of 2023.

Click here to Read/Download Order

Also Read: SC directs 2500 lawyers to approach MP High against contempt charges