Freedom of Speech and Expression doesn’t Justify Boycott of Courts and Interpuption in the functioning of the Courts

KRISHA KAMAL | PRESIDENCY UNIVERSITY BANGALORE | 27th March 2020 

DISTRICT BAR ASSOCIATION, DEHRADUN THROOUGH ITS SECRSTORY V. ISHWAR SHANDILYA & ORS.

Facts:

An SLP was filed by the District Bar Association, Dehradun through its secretory aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand on 25.09.2019 in Writ Petition (PIL) 31 of 2016. The advocates of entire district of Dehradun and several districts of Haridwar and Udham Singh Nagar have been boycotting the courts on all the Saturdays from past 35 years. Based on the information sent by the High Court to the Law Commission it was observed that the advocates of Dehradun and Haridwar district were on strike for 455 and 515 days respectively for the years in 2012-2016. This action of the advocates led to an outcome of delay in justice of the needy litigants and the functioning of the courts. On this the High Court of Uttrakhand gave the directions for the withdrawal of the advocates’ call for the strike and directed them to start attending the court on all the working Saturdays. In case of disregard of this order the advocates will have to face disciplinary action. It was also directed to the district judges to send a report to the High Court if the advocates do not attend the courts in order to consider whether an action should be initiated against the errant advocates under Contempt of Courts Act. Necessary police protection was also provided for the smooth functioning of the courts and for the prevention of the same by any strike or boycott of the advocates.

Finding this order violative of article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India the aggrieved party presented the SLP.

Judgment:

The Supreme Court in concern of their right to strike under freedom of speech and expression observed that such rights cannot be exercised at the cost of litigant and/or the justice delivery system as whole. The right of speedy justice is guaranteed under article 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. Therefore boycotting of courts by the advocates on Saturdays is not at all justifiable. Rather it comes under contempt of court as it creates hindrance in the functioning of courts. 

Agreeing with the decision of the High Court of Uttarakhand, the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP.