"Judges Are Requested Not to Meddle with the Affairs of the Bar": KHCAA Declines Justice Nambiar’s Invitation to Discuss Suspension of Senior Advocate
Kiran Raj
The Kerala High Court Advocates' Association (KHCAA) has declined an invitation from Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar to engage in a discussion concerning the Association's recent decision to suspend Senior Advocate George Poonthottam and initiate disciplinary proceedings against him.
In a letter dated April 10 addressed to Justice Nambiar, KHCAA conveyed its strong objection to what it described as judicial interference in the functioning of the bar body. “We would like to set the record straight and clearly communicate that the interference of judges in the affairs of the KHCAA is not appreciated and judges are requested not to meddle with the affairs of the Association,” the letter stated.
The Association also informed the judge that it intends to address a complaint to Chief Justice Nitin M Jamdar regarding adverse judicial orders issued by the Division Bench of Justices Nambiar and Easwaran S. These orders were passed while members of the bar were abstaining from court proceedings in protest against recent increases in court fees.
On April 9, the bench led by Justice Nambiar had expressed strong disapproval of the strike by lawyers, noting that a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the fee hike was already pending before the Chief Justice’s Bench. The Bench also objected to the content and tone of a letter sent by the KHCAA President to the Chief Justice, in which the protest was communicated. The bench found the letter to contain what it described as “unwanted advice and subtle threats,” indicating a perceived breach of decorum and respect.
KHCAA, in its response to Justice Nambiar, referred to these observations and commented, “We are not sure what taste you will find this letter in, but whenever the KHCAA writes a letter, it will be on facts and on judicial decisions and has to be taken in its literal meaning with no innuendos... We are still still grappling to find out what the ‘veiled threats’ are, but as the adage does, the beauty always likes in the hands of the beholder and we are yet to see what you have seen in the letter as ‘veiled threats’.”
The dispute involving Senior Advocate Poonthottam arose after a confrontation between the Bar and Justice A Badharudeen. The judge had reportedly engaged in an unpleasant exchange with the wife of a recently deceased lawyer. A resolution signed by Poonthottam led to an extraordinary general body meeting being convened by KHCAA, in which it was resolved to demand an open court apology from Justice Badharudeen.
Justice Badharudeen declined to issue such an apology, resulting in lawyers boycotting his court for a day. Subsequently, Chief Justice Jamdar met with Poonthottam and the lawyer's wife, who is also a member of the Bar. Justice Badharudeen stated that the incident was a misunderstanding, and the matter appeared to have been resolved.
However, KHCAA President Yeshwanth Shenoy was not part of this meeting. The Association objected to Poonthottam’s involvement in a matter that KHCAA claimed to be handling and responded by suspending his membership and initiating disciplinary proceedings. Additionally, KHCAA wrote to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, seeking the transfer of Justice Badharudeen to another High Court.
KHCAA has now distanced itself from the earlier complaints made against Justice Badharudeen. While the Association had previously objected to his conduct, the recent letter suggests that its decision to approach the CJI was prompted by Poonthottam’s actions. “Justice Badharudeen is one of the best we have in this Court... Personally, we place a higher value on integrity than courteous conduct and we will always carry that pain of having to write to the Chief Justice of India as a part of our duty as office bearers of the Association,” the letter stated. The Association also claimed that Poonthottam had made remarks concerning Justice Badharudeen’s religious beliefs.
In reference to Justice Nambiar’s observations on the protest against the court fee hike, KHCAA expressed hope that the contents of its communication would be interpreted literally. It added that it suspects the orders issued by the bench were intended to pressure the Association into resolving matters with Poonthottam.
The Association further requested that Justice Nambiar refrain from reaching out to it through any advocate. It concluded by affirming that KHCAA will continue to follow its established procedures and will not make exceptions for “persons of interest” associated with any judge.
