Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court

Bar Council Cannot Usurp Court's Powers to Restrict Advocates' Right to Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Quashes Bar Council’s Gag Order

11 October 2024 8:51 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Karnataka High Court, in S. Basavaraj v. Bar Council of India & Others, quashed a gag order imposed by the Bar Council of India on advocates of the Karnataka State Bar Council. The order had restrained advocates from making public statements regarding alleged mismanagement and corruption within the Bar Council. The High Court ruled that such a gag order violated the advocates' fundamental right to free speech, noting that the Bar Council lacked the statutory authority to impose such restrictions.

S. Basavaraj, a senior advocate, filed a writ petition challenging the Bar Council of India's April 2024 order, which prohibited members of the Karnataka State Bar Council and other advocates from speaking publicly about allegations of mismanagement during a State Level Advocates Conference held in August 2023. The Bar Council had initiated a probe into these allegations but simultaneously imposed a gag order to prevent further damage to the council's reputation.

Violation of Free Speech: The court emphasized that the gag order infringed upon the advocates' fundamental right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which can only be restricted by law and not by a statutory body like the Bar Council of India​.

Lack of Statutory Authority: The court found that the Bar Council's powers of "general supervision and control" over State Bar Councils did not include the authority to impose gag orders on advocates. The court observed that gag orders could only be issued by courts, and only in cases where it is necessary to prevent substantial risks to the fairness of a trial​.

Procedural Fairness: The court criticized the Bar Council for acting beyond its legal mandate, ruling that its actions were "de hors" the law. The Bar Council had overstepped its role by trying to suppress public discourse on matters of corruption without proper legal justification​.

The High Court quashed the Bar Council of India's gag order, declaring it unconstitutional and unsustainable. The court reaffirmed the importance of free speech and transparency within the legal profession and emphasized that only courts could impose such restrictions in accordance with the law.

This judgment reinforces the protection of advocates' right to free speech and limits the powers of statutory bodies like the Bar Council from infringing on constitutional rights. The decision ensures that public discussions on issues of professional ethics and misconduct within the legal community remain open.

Date of Decision: September 27, 2024

S. Basavaraj v. Bar Council of India & Others​.

Latest Legal News