The ongoing tensions between the Meghalaya High Court Bar Association and the Shillong Bar Association against the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) have escalated, as the local bar bodies firmly reject SCBA’s request to withdraw their resolution concerning Advocate General Amit Kumar. This development follows a series of exchanges regarding accusations made by Kumar against the Meghalaya bar associations.
On Monday, the Meghalaya High Court Bar Association and the Shillong Bar Association communicated their stance to the SCBA, emphasizing their autonomy and urging the SCBA not to interfere in their internal matters. The SCBA had previously requested the bar associations to reconsider their resolution, which seeks disciplinary action against Advocate General Amit Kumar.
The conflict began after Kumar criticized the bar associations for purportedly failing to ensure a safe environment for women lawyers and interns in Shillong. In their response, the local bar associations accused Kumar of manipulating facts to mislead the SCBA and defended their decision to strip him of his membership.
“Our decision is a democratic one,” the bar associations asserted, “and we will not be bullied or pressured into reversing it simply because it affects someone with influence.” They further criticized the SCBA for attempting to intervene, suggesting such actions could set a harmful precedent for bar associations nationwide.
The letter, addressed to SCBA Secretary Pragya Baghel, was penned by Meghalaya High Court Bar Association Secretary General Kishore Ch Gautam and Shillong Bar Association Secretary TL Jyrwa. It questions the SCBA’s understanding of local circumstances and the events that transpired during court proceedings involving Kumar’s statements.
More Read
The controversy originated from a suo motu case in the Meghalaya High Court concerning an alleged assault on an advocate in Shillong, who was previously accused of molesting a law intern. The bar associations responded to Kumar’s courtroom remarks by expelling him and calling for his removal as Advocate General.
Despite SCBA’s concerns over the resolution, which highlighted the collective responsibility for the safety and dignity of legal professionals, the Meghalaya and Shillong bar associations accused Kumar of making “reckless” allegations without evidence. They argued that his accusations diverted attention from the state’s accountability regarding mob violence and police inaction.
The local bar bodies criticized Kumar for allegedly exploiting the situation to gain an advantage in court, portraying himself as a victim while disregarding the welfare of female bar members. They emphasized that their decision reflects the collective judgment of their members, and the SCBA’s interference undermines this autonomy.
More Read
Furthermore, the bar associations claimed that a draft of the SCBA resolution was prematurely circulated by a junior of Advocate General Kumar, raising questions about how he accessed these documents before they were officially released.
“The speed at which the SCBA intervened on behalf of Mr. Amit Kumar is remarkable,” the bar associations noted, speculating whether his connections within the SCBA facilitated this early access.
