Mahendra Singh vs Anamika Kapahi
2023 Latest Caselaw 5012 MP

                                    1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                            WP No. 27105 of 2022
             (MAHENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs ANAMIKA KAPAHI AND OTHERS)

Dated : 28-03-2023
      Shri Mahendra Singh - petitioner No.1 is present in person.

      Shri Rajesh Chand - Govt. Advocate for respondents/State.

Petitioner No.1 appeared in person and informed this Court that interim relief has been granted in his favour.

Division Bench of this Court has taken suo motu cognizance of

communication made by Chairman of State Bar Council of M.P asking entire Lawyer community in State of M.P. to abstain from Court work.

In PIL vide order dated 24.3.2023 passed in W.P. No.7295/2023 in para- 18 following directions were issued:-

"18. 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 who have prevented other advocates from entering the court premises or from conducting their cases in the court;

(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."

Division Bench had issued directions to Advocates to attend the Court work forthwith and to represent their clients in their respective cases. If abstention from work is deliberate then Advocate will have to face serious

consequences including initiation of contempt petition.

In view of same, as Advocates for the parties are not appearing in the case, Registry is directed to issue show cause notice to counsel for the petitioner(s) as well as counsel for the respondent(s) whose name appears in the Vakalatnama to give explanation why Contempt Proceedings may not be initiated against him/her/them for deliberate violation of order dated 24.3.2023 passed in W.P. No.7295/2023.

Notices shall not be issued to Government Advocates appearing for State since they remained present in Court and complied with directions passed in W.P. No.7295/2023.

List the matter after two weeks.

I.R. to continue till next date of hearing.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE

sp/-

SUNIL Digitally signed by SUNIL KUMAR PATEL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya

KUMAR Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=3ad456309c8cfa67fdf9acdac6949bbc 6ea3342f02b1af1bdaf3424a04c11d99, pseudonym=EB80E81424E3C3A3FCB5801D65 B573419C2D9C68,

PATEL serialNumber=5011B37A3DD5E32019F501F10 E878D2F118732491B5F40BDC9923237D9543 65B, cn=SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Date: 2023.03.31 18:15:44 +05'30'