Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajman Kushwaha vs Union Of India on 27 March, 2023
Author: Sheel Nagu
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
RP No. 11 of 2023
(RAJMAN KUSHWAHA AND OTHERS Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS)
Dated : 27-03-2023
None of the counsel authorized by petitioner in the Power of Attorney is
present.
I n respect of a call given by the M.P. State Bar Council asking the
members of the Bar in the State of M.P. to abstain from Court work w.e.f.
23.03.2023, the Division Bench of this Court took suo moto cognizance of the
situation in WP. No.7295/2023 (In Reference (Suo Moto) vs. Chairman,
State Bar Council of M.P. & Others) and passed order on 24.03.2023, the
operative portion of which is reproduced below for ready reference and
convenience:-
"œ1 8 . Under these circumstances, since the judgment of the
Hon'™ble Supreme Court has been violated and keeping in mind
the interest of the poor litigants, we deem it just and necessary to
issue the following directions:-
(i) All the advocates throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh are
hereby directed to attend to their court work forthwith. They shall
represent their clients in the respective cases before the respective
courts forthwith;
(ii) If any lawyer deliberately avoids to attend the court, it shall be
presumed that there is disobedience of this order and he will be
faced with serious consequences including initiation of proceedings
for contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act;
(iii) If any lawyer prevents any other lawyer from attending the
court work, the same would be considered as disobedience of these
directions and he will be faced with serious consequences including
initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act;
(iv) Each of the judicial officers are directed to submit a report as to
which lawyer has deliberately abstained from attending the court;
(v) The judicial officers shall also mention the names of advocates
w h o have prevented other advocates from entering the court
premises or from conducting their cases in the court;
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MRS. LORETTA
RAJ
Signing time: 3/29/2023
12:39:04 PM
2
(vi) Such advocates shall be dealt with seriously which may even
include proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act as well as
being debarred from practice.
The Registry is directed to ensure that all the respondents are
served with the notice of this petition as well as of this order
forthwith.
Post after service of notice."
Despite writ of mandamus having been issued by Coordinate Bench on
24.03.2023, counsel for petitioner Shri Manoj Kumar Rajak, Shri Pradeep
Kumar Dwivedi, Shri Harish Chandra Singh, Shri Shivam Mishra, Shri
Prabhanshu Shukla, Shri Aditya Veer Singh, Shri Shrikant Mishra, Shri
Nitin Agrawal, and Shri Manish Kholia and despite being authorized by
petitioner vide Power of Attorney, are abstaining from Court work.
This prima facie amounts to disobedience of the writ of mandamus
issued on 24.03.2023 in WP. No.7295/2023.
Accordingly, Registry is directed to issue show cause notice to Shri
Manoj Kumar Rajak, Shri Pradeep Kumar Dwivedi, Shri Harish
Chandra Singh, Shri Shivam Mishra, Shri Prabhanshu Shukla, Shri
Aditya Veer Singh, Shri Shrikant Mishra, Shri Nitin Agrawal, and Shri
Manish Kholia to explain before the next date of hearing as to why
proceedings for contempt be not initiated against them for disobedience of
order passed by the Division Bench on 24.03.2023 in WP. No.7295/2023.
Registry is further directed to maintain a separate file qua the contempt
notice.
List after two weeks.
(SHEEL NAGU) (VIRENDER SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
Loretta
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MRS. LORETTA
RAJ
Signing time: 3/29/2023
12:39:04 PM
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MRS. LORETTA
RAJ
Signing time: 3/29/2023
12:39:04 PM
