The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that senior members of the Bar should set an example for juniors when it comes to conduct in and outside court (Yatin Narendra Oza v. High Court of Gujarat)..A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy was hearing the petition filed by Gujarat lawyer Yatin Oza challenging the decision of the Full Court of the Gujarat High Court to take away his Senior designation for making allegations against the High Court and its Registry. .While hearing the matter, the Court highlighted how Oza has indulged in such conduct on various occasions since 2006.In this regard, Justice Kaul proceeded to take the example of incidents at Chennai and how such things could become endemic."What has happened and has been happening at Chennai might trouble senior lawyers and judges. We cited the example of Chennai to state that sometimes the problem becomes endemic," said Justice Kaul.Justice Kaul had served as Chief Justice of Madras High Court where he had to deal with protests and chaos by lawyers inside the court building. Justice Kaul had to eventually implement stricter measures for security of court building including entrusting the security to Central Industrial Security Force (CISF).While it was not clear whether Justice Kaul was referring to this particular incident, he proceeded to state how conduct of seniors could influence juniors at the Bar."There is a way of doing things and a way of not doing things. There are many things he has done which is not how it should have been done. He is a leader of the Bar. What example is being set for juniors?" the judge remarked..Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Oza, urged that his Senior designation should not be taken away permanently."The first punishment need not be death penalty and second punishment need not be life imprisonment and third punishment need not be 10 years imprisonment. Here, taking away senior gown is professional death penalty."However, Justice Reddy pointed out,"High Court says it is happening since 2006 and every time, an affidavit is given of apology. How can this happen forever?".The Court then made a suggestion to Gujarat High Court counsel Nikhil Goel that the decision to take away Oza's gown could be kept in abeyance and it could automatically kick in if and when he commits any further infractions.Goel, however, said that there might be no legal provision for the same.The Court, however, remarked that it can exercise powers under Article 142 to get over absence of a legal provision."We often use (Article) 142 to do things which we otherwise find difficult to do," said Justice Kaul..Goel also chose to highlight Oza's conduct after contempt of court proceedings were initiated. "He initially defended his conduct on merits. His apology came after all that. He did not tender apology at the first instance," Goel said. The Court eventually deferred the hearing in the case, saying it needs to consider various submissions and examine its ramifications. The matter will be heard again on October 7..The decision to withdraw Oza’s Senior gown was taken by the Gujarat High Court in July 2020 after Oza raised allegations of corruption against the High Court Registry.Simultaneously, the High Court had also initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against Oza and found him guilty of the same..Oza had appealed to the Supreme Court against the contempt judgment while also filing a separate writ petition challenging the full court decision of the High Court to withdraw his Senior gown.The apex court had asked the High Court in March to explore the option of keeping in abeyance its decision to strip Oza of the gown..On the last date of hearing, the Court laid down specific timelines to be adhered to by counsel while arguing the case.