The Supreme Court on Monday urged the High Courts to constitute grievance redressal committees across courts in India to foster better relations between lawyers and judges.

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said such institutionalized mechanism will ensure that any issues that may arise between the members of the bar and judiciary are amicably and timely resolved.

The Court passed the direction after hearing a matter related to Andhra Pradesh High Court Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao's recent courtroom outburst against a young lawyer appearing before him.

A video clip of the same had gone viral on social media last week triggering outrage, especially among the younger members of the bar.

The Supreme Court had then taken cognisance of the same.

The Court on Monday asked the judges to exhibit patience, compassion and a spirit of encouragement towards young lawyers.Young law graduates must be encouraged to join the Bar, especially in trial courts, the Court stressed.

"While it is certainly solemn duty of senior members of Bar to inculcate discipline, professional ethics and continuous learning, the responsibility does not lie with bar alone, but it's with the Bench as well which fosters a sense of duty, integrity so that every lawyer see themselves as an officer of the court first," the Bench said.

The Court further said that judiciary must remain mindful of the fact that strength and calibre of the Bench at all levels is dependent upon continuous nurturing and development of Bar at all levels.

The Court further said that the media should not circulate courtroom video clips without providing any context.

"We make an unequivocal observation that media has an important role to play. Sensationalising decontextualized clips has the ability to hamper adminstration of justice. Thus we expect media will play a proactive role with heightened sense of responsibility in collaboration with Bar & Bench," the Bench said.

However, the Court also said that legal journalists act very responsibly when it comes to court proceeding.

"They are doing great public service," the Bench said.

The apex court decided to examine the matter after the Bar Council of India (BCI) and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) passed resolutions expressing “deep concern and shock” over the Andhra Pradesh High Court incident.

SCBA President Senior Advocate Vikas Singh today called for in-house guidelines to deal with such incidents.

At the outset of the hearing, CJI Kant revealed that a report was called from the High Court after the incident was brought to his notice.

The report explained the context of the judge's oral remarks and also stated that the video clip circulated on the internet was bereft of any context. In the report, High Court Chief Justice Lisa Gill also said the matter was resolved to the satisfaction of the High Court Bar Association.

A committee of five judges at the High Court has been constituted to maintain cordial relations between the bar and the bench, the report said.

Considering the Chief Justice's report, the Court said the incident does not warrant further action at its end.

"It appears that the judge sought to draw attention to s precedent which supported him. However the counsel cited a precedent which the judge felt was not applicable. It was then the file slipped and fell. Though there were no such intention, the judge construed it as an impropriety. The incident does not warrant any further action at our end," the Court said.

The controversy arose from proceedings before the Andhra Pradesh High Court on May 5 during the hearing of a petition challenging a Look Out Circular and the impounding of a litigant’s passport.

During the hearing, Justice Rao rebuked the young advocate appearing in the matter and questioned whether he considered himself a “great Senior Advocate.”

“Have I decided to dismiss your writ petition? Generally what the judges will do, they will follow their own orders. Are you thinking [you] are a great Senior Advocate? Call the police. You go and file appeal,” the judge told the lawyer.

A video clip of the exchange, which later went viral on social media, showed the advocate apologizing repeatedly and pleading for leniency with folded hands.

“Sorry… I am begging for your grace, your lordships,” the lawyer was heard saying.

The Court nevertheless proceeded to direct police personnel to take the advocate into custody for 24 hours, while also observing that the counsel had behaved “indolently.” The direction was later withdrawn following intervention by the High Court Bar Association.

The incident triggered sharp reactions from bar bodies across the country.

In its resolution dated May 6, the SCBA said the episode had “deeply disappointed young members of the legal profession” and warned that actions causing fear, humiliation, or intimidation amongst young advocates could adversely affect the independence of the Bar and the justice delivery system.

“The SCBA firmly believes that the relationship between the Bench and the Bar is founded upon mutual respect, dignity, patience, and institutional balance,” the SCBA resolution stated.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) also wrote to the Chief Justice of India seeking intervention and raising concerns over the conduct of the judge.

Referring to the viral video, the BCI said the incident raised serious concerns regarding judicial temperament, proportionality and fairness.

“Incidents of this nature have a chilling effect upon young members of the Bar. They create fear in the minds. The dignity of the Court is not enhanced when a lawyer is made to beg for grace in open Court and is still sent to custody for a procedural lapse,” the BCI said.

The BCI also stated that it found “nothing wrong" with the conduct of the young lawyer.