The Supreme Court on Monday refused to issue any further directions in connection with the recent incident involving an Andhra Pradesh High Court judge and a young advocate after noting that the matter had already been resolved amicably at the High Court level through the intervention of the Chief Justice and the Bar Association.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the controversy arose out of a misunderstanding during court proceedings and that the oral remarks made by the judge did not culminate in any executable judicial order. The judge appeared to have formed an impression that the advocate had intentionally thrown files on the podium in anger, whereas the advocate maintained that the files had accidentally slipped from his hands, it noted.
Taking note of the fact that the dispute had been settled internally and that the advocate concerned no longer had any grievance, the Bench considered it unnecessary to prolong the issue further through judicial intervention. At the same time, it made significant observations regarding judicial conduct, courtroom discipline and institutional sensitivity towards young members of the Bar.
The Court emphasised that members of the judiciary at all levels must display patience, restraint, compassion and an encouraging attitude, particularly while dealing with junior advocates and first-generation practitioners. While senior members of the Bar have a professional obligation to inculcate discipline, ethics and advocacy standards among younger lawyers, the Bench also carries an equal institutional responsibility to nurture integrity, professionalism and respect for the administration of justice, it noted.
Terming the advocates as officers of the court, the Apex Court said they must be treated in a manner that preserved both dignity and institutional confidence. It further expressed concern over the circulation of decontextualised courtroom video clips on social media and advised the media to exercise caution and responsibility while reporting judicial proceedings. The Bench observed that selective or truncated dissemination of courtroom exchanges without full context could create unwarranted prejudice and adversely affect institutional credibility.
The matter was taken up in suo motu proceedings initiated on the basis of representations submitted by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Bar Council of India (BCI) following circulation of a viral video allegedly showing Andhra Pradesh High Court judge Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao threatening a young lawyer with police custody during a hearing.
During the proceedings, SCBA President Senior Advocate Vikas Singh submitted that an internal institutional mechanism should be evolved to prevent recurrence of such incidents and to ensure protection and encouragement for young advocates entering the profession.
The Supreme Court acknowledged the importance of creating a supportive judicial atmosphere for junior lawyers and observed that sensitisation of judges at all levels was equally necessary for maintaining healthy Bench-Bar relations. In its order, the Court appreciated the initiatives undertaken by the SCBA for mentoring and integrating young lawyers into the legal profession and suggested that similar measures be adopted by the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils across the country.
The Bench further recommended that all High Courts constitute Grievance Redressal Committees involving representatives of Bar Associations and Bar Councils to address disputes arising between advocates and members of the judiciary. The Court suggested that similar committees should also be established at district and taluka levels to facilitate the timely and amicable resolution of institutional issues affecting courtroom functioning and professional conduct.
The controversy stemmed from a courtroom exchange on May 5, 2026, during which the Andhra Pradesh High Court judge was seen orally rebuking a young advocate and directing that police personnel be called. The incident triggered widespread concern within the legal fraternity, following which the Bar bodies sought intervention to address issues relating to judicial restraint, professional dignity and institutional accountability.
The post Supreme Court declines further directions in Andhra Pradesh High Court judge-lawyer incident appeared first on India Legal.