Supreme Court: The three Judge Bench comprising of Dr. DY Chandrachud, CJI., JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ. issued notice and took suo motu cognizance of the incident where Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia was physically manhandled.
Senior Advocate and Bharatiya Janata Party’s spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia was physically manhandled in the Gautam Budh Nagar District Court by a lawyer when a strike was called out. It was submitted before the Court that Senior Advocate Bhatia was appearing in a matter and when he was informed that strike was called out for the day, he intended to seek an adjournment in the matter. However, the lawyers misbehaved with him and snatched his band.
It was also submitted before the Court that when the strike was called out a young female lawyer was also manhandled, was asked to take off her advocate’s band and pushed.
The Court considered the matter as ‘serious’ and took suo motu cognizance of the incident. The Court remarked that “manhandling of two SCBA members warrants interference of the Court, and it is in violation of binding principles laid down by the Court.” The CJI also remarked that “a strike by members of the bar affects the litigants who are vital stakeholders in the justice system.” The Court issued notice to the Janpad Diwani Evam Faujdari Bar Association, Gautam Budh Nagar and sought personal presence of the President and Secretary. The Court sought a report from the District Judge and directed for the preservation of the CCTV footage in safe custody. The Court also directed the District Judge in whose Court, the young female lawyer was allegedly manhandled to seek a report of the incident from the administrative staff.
The matter was listed for hearing on 01-04-2024.
Image Source: https://twitter.com/gauravbhatiabjp/phot
When a lawyer is manhandled SC immediately takes suo moto cognisance where as when doctors are manhandled and even killed the court says they must accept the professional hazard…why this duplicity