Recently, the Tripura High Court came to the aid of a young advocate who faced disciplinary proceedings after appearing before a Consumer Commission despite a boycott resolution passed by the Bar Association. The Court examined whether Bar Associations can restrain advocates from attending courts and take action against them for performing professional duties towards their clients.
The matter arose from an interlocutory application filed along with a writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Applicant, a junior advocate practicing in West Tripura, sought interim protection against a show-cause notice issued by the Tripura Bar Association. The notice alleged that the advocate had violated a resolution adopted by the Association calling for boycott of appearances before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Agartala.
According to the Applicant, the office bearers of the Bar Association had passed a resolution, directing advocates not to appear before the Consumer Commission. However, the advocate chose to represent his client before the forum, stating that he was duty-bound to discharge his obligations under the vakalatnama and the Advocates Act. Following his appearance, the Bar Association issued a show-cause notice accusing him of acting against the General Body resolution.
The advocate contended before the High Court that no lawyer can be prevented from performing professional duties entrusted by a client. It was argued that the duty of an advocate towards the client is paramount and that the action initiated by the Bar Association was arbitrary and contrary to settled law. Reliance was placed upon the Supreme Court judgment in Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45, where the Apex Court had categorically held that lawyers have no right to go on strike or boycott courts.
The Petitioner further submitted that there exists no rule, regulation, or bye-law empowering a Bar Association to penalise an advocate merely for appearing before a court or tribunal. He also informed the Court that the Bar Council of Tripura had already stayed further proceedings against him by communication.
While considering the matter, Justice Dr. T. Amarnath Goud observed that the legal profession carries a duty towards both litigants and the justice delivery system. The Court noted that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that strikes and boycott calls by lawyers are illegal and impermissible in law. The Court expressed concern over attempts by office bearers of Bar Associations to prevent advocates from attending courts and forums.
The High Court observed that the action initiated against the advocate was “irrelevant, extraneous and also arbitrary.” It further held that no Bar Council Rules, Bar Association Regulations, or bye-laws mandate boycott of courts. The Court made it clear that there is no legal provision authorising action against a lawyer merely because he attended court proceedings in fulfilment of his professional obligations towards a client.
Emphasising the dignity of the legal profession and the majesty of courts, the High Court remarked that such actions by Bar Associations are wholly unjustified and contrary to law. The Court also referred to instances where the Supreme Court had taken strict action against office bearers of Bar Associations for enforcing boycott calls and obstructing judicial work.
Consequently, the Tripura High Court granted interim relief in favour of the advocate and stayed the operation of the Bar Association’s resolution. The Court further permitted the applicant to appear before all courts and forums without any restriction flowing from the boycott resolution, observing that the said resolution would remain inoperative until further orders.
Case Title: Sri Sampad Choudhury vs. The State of Tripura & Ors.
Case No.: WP(C) No. 305 of 2026
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. T. Amarnath Goud
Advocate for the Petitioner: Adv. S. Choudhury
Advocate for the Respondents: Adv. M. Sarkar, Adv A. Kakoti, Sr. G. A. P. Gautam
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
