The Tripura High Court has stayed action initiated by the Tripura Bar Association against an advocate who was issued a show-cause notice for appearing before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission despite a Bar Association resolution calling for boycott of the forum.

Justice Dr. T. Amarnath Goud observed that no lawyer can be prevented from discharging professional duties towards a client merely on account of a boycott call issued by a Bar Association. The Court prima facie found the action of the Bar Association’s office-bearers to be arbitrary, irrelevant and contrary to law.

The petitioner, a junior advocate practising in West Tripura, contended that he had appeared before the Consumer Commission in fulfilment of his professional obligation to his client, following which the Bar Association issued a show-cause notice alleging violation of its resolution dated January 19, 2026. He had also approached the Bar Council of Tripura, which had granted interim stay on the Bar Association’s resolution.

Taking note of Supreme Court precedents holding that lawyers have no right to go on strike or boycott courts, the High Court said such actions are wholly unjustified and impermissible in law. It further remarked that neither Bar Council rules nor Bar Association regulations empower office-bearers to initiate action against an advocate for appearing before a court or forum in discharge of legal duties.

Holding that the petitioner had made out a case for interim relief, the Court stayed operation of the Bar Association’s resolution and permitted the advocate to appear before all courts without reference to the impugned boycott resolution until further orders.

Appearances:

For the Applicant: Mr. S. Choudhury, Advocate (Petitioner in Person); Ms. M. Sarkar, Advocate; Mr. A. Kakoti, Advocate

For the Respondents: Mr. P. Gautam, Sr. Government Advocate