The Supreme Court of India recently expressed strong disapproval of a lawyer’s conduct after he threatened to commit suicide during a hearing. The incident occurred on Monday, March 3, when the lawyer appeared via video conference in a case related to a criminal complaint filed against him.

A bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was shocked by the lawyer’s behavior. The lawyer had stated that he would take his own life if the court quashed the FIR registered by him against another lawyer while dismissing his petition. The court recorded its displeasure, stating,

“Today in the morning when the petition was called out, the first petitioner, who is a member of the Bar, appeared through VC and stated that if the court quashes the FIR registered by him against the second respondent, he will commit suicide. We are shocked to record such conduct on the part of a member of the Bar.”

The bench directed the lawyer to submit a written apology and provide an undertaking that he would not repeat such behavior in the future. The court clarified that while it was not forcing the lawyer to apologize, failure to do so would result in legal consequences.

“Now in the afternoon, the first petitioner appears and apologizes. However, we expect the first petitioner to tender a written apology and undertaking not to repeat such submissions. We are not forcing the first petitioner to tender an apology in writing and give assurance as stated above, but we make it clear that on his failure to do so, necessary consequences in terms of law will follow,” the court stated.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Highlights the Lack of Opportunities for Trial Court Lawyers in Senior Designation System

Background of the Case

The case originated from a dispute between two lawyers in Kodaikanal, Tamil Nadu. The petitioner had filed a complaint against another lawyer, who was the president of a local bar association, alleging that he was abused and assaulted on December 18, 2017. Based on the complaint, an FIR was registered, and a charge sheet was filed against the respondent.

However, the respondent also filed a counter-complaint against the petitioner. While the police closed the counter-case as a “mistake of fact,” the respondent filed a protest petition. Subsequently, the Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the complaint against the petitioner under Sections 294(b), 323, and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The petitioner approached the Madras High Court to quash the case, but his plea was dismissed. He then moved to the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court’s order.

On October 21, 2024, the Supreme Court suggested an amicable settlement between the two lawyers. However, on January 27, 2025, the petitioner’s counsel refused to withdraw the case, despite the respondent’s willingness to apologize. The court had advised the petitioner to reconsider his stance.

During the recent hearing, Justice Oka noted that the respondent had already apologized to the petitioner, the court, the Bar Council, and the Bar Association. However, the petitioner shocked the court by declaring, “I will commit suicide, my lord.”

Read Also:- Delhi Lawyers Protest Against Advocates (Amendment) Bill: Key Details and Concerns

Justice Oka sternly warned the lawyer, stating,

“We are warning you. We will order the registration of an FIR against you if you threaten the court. We will not tolerate such conduct by a member of the Bar. Two things we will order: one is the registration of an FIR, and secondly, this will amount to misconduct. We will ask the Bar Council to initiate proceedings against him and suspend his registration.”

The court temporarily paused the hearing, asking the petitioner’s counsel to speak with him. Justice Oka remarked, 

“Please tell him that such threats will result in an FIR. And please tell him that we don’t get impressed with such threats.”

When the hearing resumed, the petitioner rejoined the virtual proceedings and apologized, saying, 

“My lords, I sincerely apologize. I was emotional.” Justice Oka responded, “Is this how you represent your clients in court? Submit a written apology. After that, we will dispose of the case.”

The court has scheduled the next hearing for Friday to consider the petitioner’s written apology.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Questions Advocate-on-Record's Authority to Delegate Arguments

Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court strongly condemned the lawyer’s threat of suicide during the hearing.
• The court demanded a written apology and an undertaking to prevent such behavior in the future.
• Failure to comply could result in legal consequences, including the registration of an FIR and disciplinary action by the Bar Council.
• The case highlights the importance of maintaining decorum and professionalism in judicial proceedings.

This incident serves as a reminder of the high standards of conduct expected from members of the legal profession. The Supreme Court’s firm stance underscores its commitment to upholding the dignity of the judiciary and ensuring that such behavior is not tolerated.

The Court kept the matter next Friday to consider the petitioner's apology.