Ramesh Naik L v. Karnataka State Bar Council
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the State Bar Council to instruct the Mysore District Bar Association to allow members to represent accused persons in sedition cases, challenging a notice purportedly restricting such representation. The court dismissed the petition, relying on Supreme Court precedent stating that such resolution is null and void.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S.OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION No. 3301 OF 2020 (GM-RES) PIL
BETWEEN:
RAMESH NAIK.L S/O LATE LAKSHMAN NAIK.R. AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, KADARANAHALLI THANDYA, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT – 572 140. ….PETITIONER
(BY SRI RAMESH NAIK.L, PETITIONER-IN-PERSON)
AND:
- KARNATAKA STATE BAR COUNCIL, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, OLD KGID BUILDING, Dr.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the State Bar Council is empowered to direct a Bar Association to safeguard advocates' rights against discriminatory restrictions.
Whether resolutions by a Bar Association prohibiting members from appearing for accused persons are legally valid.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Ramesh Naik.L
- respondent
Karnataka State Bar Council
- respondent
Mysore District Bar Association
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/3301/2020
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court