Proceedings in Karnataka High Court crippled due to boycott call by advocates’ body opposing decision to transfer four judges

A view of the High Court of Karnataka building.
| Photo Credit:

The proceedings in the High Court of Karnataka were severely affected on Wednesday due to the boycott call given by the Advocates’ Association, Bengaluru, (AAB), opposing the decision of the apex court’s collegium to transfer four judges to other High Courts.

Though the AAB in its general body meeting held on April 22 passed a resolution for “abstaining from work”, a good number of advocates were present in all the court halls of the High Court’s principal Bench in Bengaluru on Wednesday morning.

However, several office-bearers, including AAB president Vivek Subba Reddy, went to all the court halls and requested the advocates, who were waiting for the court proceedings to commence, to leave the court halls, stating that the AAB had passed a resolution to abstain from the High Court proceedings.

While many advocates left the court halls, some resisted and remained in the halls and participated in the proceedings. A large number of advocates participated in the proceedings by utilising the videoconference facility.

The AAB office-bearers entered some court halls when the proceedings were under way and urged the advocates to leave the halls stating that the association has called for boycotting the proceedings not for any personal interest but to safeguard the interest of the High Court by opposing the decision to transfer four judges — Justices Krishna S. Dixit, K. Natarajan, N.S. Sanjay Gowda, and Hemant Chandangoudar.

Meanwhile, the court corridors witnessed some heated arguments between a few office-bearers of the AAB and a few advocates over the issue of abstaining from court proceedings. An advocate told a Division Bench that it is difficult for the advocates to appear on Wednesday as the AAB was insisting on abstaining from proceedings, and there were ‘scuffles’ among advocates over the issue of boycott.

Despite the boycott call, the proceedings in several court halls, including in the Chief Justice’s court hall and the court hall in which petitions seeking bail are heard, were conducted. In many cases, the court granted bail or anticipatory bail to petitioner-accused persons even in the absence of their advocates, after hearing the government advocates, who represent the police.

In court hall number-1, a government advocate told the office-bearers of the AAB not to embarrass her when they asked even government advocates to leave the court when the proceedings were under way. In several court halls, litigants personally appeared and requested for adjournment.