Bench Emphasizes Restraint in Bar-Bench Interactions, Stresses Advocates' Duty to Uphold Court Decorum
In a significant judgment dated October 21, 2026, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court (Division Bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and M.A. Chowdhary) set aside an order passed by a Tribunal imposing a cost of Rs. 10,000 on a Senior Counsel without providing an opportunity of hearing. The writ petition filed by Jahangir Iqbal Ganai challenged the Tribunal's order, which the Court found to be in blatant violation of the principles of natural justice.
The Court observed that the Tribunal's unilateral decision to impose costs on the learned Senior Counsel without affording him a chance to present his side was legally impermissible and amounted to a breach of fundamental fairness. The Court unequivocally stated that such procedural lapses render the impugned order liable to be quashed.
The matter also brought to the fore the delicate relationship between the Bar and the Bench. While acknowledging that heated exchanges during court proceedings are not uncommon, the Court underscored the need for judicial restraint. It advised that the Bench should avoid escalating disputes into contempt proceedings or personal cost impositions on advocates, which can aggravate tensions unnecessarily.
Conversely, the Court highlighted the higher responsibility borne by advocates, especially Senior Advocates, to maintain the dignity and decorum of the Court. It urged them to ensure that minor differences in perceptions do not spiral into adversarial confrontations that disrupt the harmonious functioning of the justice delivery system.
The Court's order also revealed the lack of cooperation from the Tribunal members during the Court's attempts at mediation, as they neither appeared in person nor responded to virtual hearing requests. This non-cooperation was noted with concern but did not deter the Court from delivering a clear and principled judgment.
By quashing the Tribunal's order, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed the fundamental tenet that no order affecting a party's rights should be passed without providing a fair hearing, thus safeguarding the principles of natural justice. The writ petition was allowed in full, closing the matter.
Bottom Line:
Principles of natural justice - Tribunal imposed cost of Rs. 10,000/- upon learned Senior Counsel without affording opportunity of hearing - Such order held contrary to law and in breach of natural justice - Order quashed - Court observed that Bench should show restraint in heated exchanges with Bar and avoid escalating matters into contempt proceedings or personal costs against advocates.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 226, Constitution of India, 1950
Jahangir Iqbal Ganai v. Mohd. Amin Dar, (J&K and Ladakh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3001060
