Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Gayatri Soni vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 March, 2023
Author: Vishal Dhagat
Bench: Vishal Dhagat
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
WP No. 9487 of 2022
(SMT. GAYATRI SONI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
WP/09483/2022, WP/09484/2022, WP/10758/2022, WP/10760/2022, WP/11701/2022,
WP/11970/2022, WP/14337/2022, WP/16421/2022, WP/16422/2022, WP/16530/2022,
WP/16532/2022, WP/16918/2022, WP/16920/2022, WP/26809/2022
Dated : 27-03-2023
None appears for petitioner.
Shri Yash Soni, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2-State.
Shri H.S.Ruprah, learned counsel for Respondent No.3-Municipal Corporation Katni.
Counsel for respondents prays for short time to prepare and argue the matter.
Prayer is allowed.
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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETI TIWARI Signing time: 3/28/2023 3:14:48 PM 2 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 Advocate for the petitioner is not appearing in the Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETI TIWARI Signing time: 3/28/2023 3:14:48 PM 3 case, Registry is directed to issue show cause notice to counsel for petitioner(s), whose name appears in the Vakalatnama that 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 WP No.7295/2023.
List the matter after four weeks.
(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE nd Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETI TIWARI Signing time: 3/28/2023 3:14:48 PM