The Supreme Court of India has declined to entertain a petition seeking an independent probe into an alleged brawl between lawyers at the Bar Council of India premises. A bench headed by CJI Surya Kant refused direct intervention in the matter, advising senior advocate Prashant Bhushan to approach the Delhi High Court instead. The top court emphasized that directing the petitioner to the High Court was necessary to prevent any public perception of institutional bias in handling disputes concerning governing legal bodies.
Background of the Bar Council Premises Clash
The controversy stems from an incident on the 21st that was recorded on video, showing a physical altercation among lawyers inside the Bar Council of India office. According to senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, the lawyers had gathered to register a protest after submitting a formal memorandum demanding administrative and structural reforms. Bhushan submitted before the court that legal professionals possess a fundamental right to raise their demands through peaceful protests, though the demonstration escalated into a physical confrontation on the date of the incident.
Demand for CBI Probe and CCTV Preservation
Mentioning the matter before CJI Surya Kant on Thursday, Prashant Bhushan raised strong objections to statements attributed to Bar Council of India Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra. The petition highlighted that the Chairman had allegedly referred to the protesting lawyers as legal cockroaches and boasted about individuals confronting and thrashing them at midnight. Citing apprehensions that crucial evidence could be tampered with or destroyed by the Bar Council management, Bhushan requested the apex court to order an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation and issue directions to immediately secure all CCTV footage from the premises.
Supreme Court Focus on Institutional Neutrality
During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant questioned why the petitioner chose to bypass the High Court, asking Prashant Bhushan what prevented him from seeking relief there first. Addressing the counsel, the CJI noted that taking up such disputes directly in the Supreme Court could give rise to misgivings among the public regarding institutional bias. Even as Prashant Bhushan pointed out that other related matters involving the Bar Council of India were pending before the top court, the bench remained steadfast in its decision, reiterating that the Delhi High Court is the appropriate forum for the matter.
