BENGALURU: The High Court of Karnataka on Tuesday initiated two separate suo motu proceedings in connection with boycott of court proceedings against the recent murders and attempts to murder advocates in various parts of the state.
One was initiated by a division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice KS Hemalekha against disruption of proceedings by some unidentified individuals among a group of advocates who had barged into the Chief Justice’s court hall.
The other was a public interest litigation taken up by a division bench of Justice DK Singh and Justice H Shanthi Bhushan based on a representation by the Advocates’ Association of Bengaluru (AAB) and the Karnataka State Bar Council over safety and professional independence of advocates.
The reason for initiating the suo motu contempt proceedings is the group’s action of forcing the advocates to leave the Chief Justice’s court hall in response to a call given to boycott the court proceedings across the state by AAB.
Taking exception, the division bench headed by the chief justice ordered registration of contempt of court proceedings and issue notice to AAB, noting that “prima facie we are of the view that this conduct amounts to contemptuous behaviour.” Immediately after the registration of contempt of court proceedings, AAB treasurer Shwetha Ravishankar appeared before the bench and offered an apology, explaining the reason for the incident.
The bench said the AAB’s response will be heard during the hearing of the contempt of court proceedings on November 19. “This is the High Court, and if you think that anyone can start creating a ruckus, then the consequences must follow,” the bench told her.
Before this, the group led by AAB president Vivek Subba Reddy entered Court Hall 2 and asked the advocates there to leave. But the division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice KS Bharath Kumar took serious exception to the conduct of the AAB office-bearers. This apart, various groups of advocates, including AAB office-bearers, entered other court halls and forced the advocates to boycott the proceedings.
