Madhya Pradesh High Court bars ten advocates from law practice for a month

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently barred ten office bearers of the Bar Association at Seoni from appearing before any court for one month after they called for a strike [In Re (Suo Motu) v Chairman & Ors].A bench of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra directed,"In view of the submission made, the aforesaid advocates shall not be permitted to appear in any court for a period of one month w.e.f. 21.03.2024."The ten lawyers are Ravi Kumar Golhani, Shishupal Yadav, Ritesh Ahuja, Manoj Harnikhede, Naval Kishor Soni, Rishabh Jain, Satyendra Thakur, Asraf Khan, Vipul Baghel and Praveen Singh Chouhan..The Bar Association at Seoni had announced a three-day strike on March 18, 19, and 20 after which the Court had registered a suo motu case against the members.Subsequently, the Court sought a response from the State Bar Council regarding whether it would adhere to the directives issued by a division bench of the High Court in the case of Praveen Pandey v State of Madhya Pradesh and others which was decided on July 31, 2018..In that case, specific directives were provided regarding the steps to be taken by the Bar Council when the High Court Bar Association or District Bar Association calls for a strike.The Bar Council's lawyer argued that they will issue show cause notice under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, including the possibility of suspending the enrollment of the relevant office bearers for misconduct. .He further submitted that as per the direction in paragraph 23(B)(ii) of the 2018 case, the office bearers shall not be permitted to appear in any court for one month..The counsel also submitted that in pursuance to paragraph 23(B)(iii), the office bearers shall not be eligible to contest the elections for three years either for any post in Bar Association or the State Bar Council.In view of the above, the Court directed that the ten lawyers will not be allowed to appear in any court for one month.The respondent's counsel sought time to file reply which was granted by the Court.The matter will be heard next on April 8..[Read Order]