Today, On 7th April, During a heated exchange in court, the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court told a Senior Advocate that he did not deserve the title after the lawyer raised his voice. The confrontation occurred during proceedings, drawing sharp remarks from the bench. Taking serious note of the conduct, the Court decided to escalate the matter. It ordered the lawyer’s name to be placed before the Full Court for reconsideration of his Senior Advocate status.
There was a heated argument in Court Hall 1 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday between Senior Advocate NS Ruprah and Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, who remarked that Ruprah did not deserve to hold the designation of Senior Advocate.
Chief Justice Kait noted that Ruprah had created a disturbance in the courtroom and raised his voice during the hearing, behavior deemed inappropriate for a Senior Advocate. The Court ordered that his name be presented to the Full Court for reconsideration of his Senior Advocate status.
He Stated,
“When this Court asked learned Senior Counsel Mr. Ruprah whether Respondent No. 5 is present, he created a ruckus in the courtroom and raised his voice, which has been recorded in the live stream of this Court. This Court had no option but to hear Mr. Ruprah, and instead of answering the query of this Court, he raised his voice like anything. He is a Senior Advocate designated by this Court. Therefore, we are of the view that he does not deserve to be a Senior Advocate. Therefore, we hereby direct the Registrar General of this Court to put his name before the Full Court to see whether he needs to be continued as a Senior Advocate or not.”
The Court also told Ruprah not to appear before the Chief Justice’s bench until further orders. The hearing was about a case involving illegal liquor, and the Court was shocked that respondent number 5 represented by Ruprah did not appear, even after earlier directions.
The bench pointed out that Ruprah had submitted a joint application under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) to record a compromise between the parties. However, when questioned about the application, he raised his voice, claiming that the Chief Justice was unwilling to hear his arguments.
After the Court issued its directive, Ruprah attempted to continue his submissions in the case,
“When my lord is not allowing me to make submissions, I have to sometimes…a very, very stringent punishment has been given to me. As an advocate…”
The Court responded,
“You are not behaving as an advocate. You are behaving as a dictator and you want to dictate terms to the Court.”
Despite Ruprah’s protests, the Court stated,
“Your Senior designation has to be reconsidered by the High Court. You continue to raise your voice; everything is recorded, Mr. Ruprah, this is live-streaming. We can’t compromise with the dignity of the Chair.”
Ruprah continued to express his frustration, saying,
“Why my lord is not listening to me? Why I raised my voice? I am human being. I know that my client is correct, but in spite of that, because of pressure…”
Chief Justice Kait replied,
“Who put the pressure? We haven’t put any pressure. Don’t use such type of words…”
When Ruprah requested that the order to reconsider his Senior Advocate designation be revoked, the Court stated,
“We have to reconsider…please do not appear before this Court. If you are aggrieved, you can challenge it wherever you want… Tumne toh sir pe chadha liya hai asman pura. Apne for granted le liya hai court ko agar senior bana diya hai toh? (You have completely overstepped your bounds. Just because you have been designated a Senior Advocate, you think you can take the Court for granted?)”
Ruprah responded,
“Why should counsel pay such a price?”
Chief Justice Kait replied,
“Because counsel created ruckus in this court…you have not behaved like an officer of the court,”
Ultimately, the Court decided that the matter of Ruprah’s designation, along with a recording of the day’s proceedings, would be submitted to the Full Court for consideration.
In India, the title of Senior Advocate is a mark of distinction given to lawyers who have shown exceptional ability, experience, and standing in the legal profession. The designation is granted by the High Courts or the Supreme Court under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Once designated, a Senior Advocate follows certain restrictions, like not dealing directly with clients or drafting pleadings, and usually works with a junior advocate. The title is both an honor and a responsibility, reflecting the advocate’s contribution to the legal field.
Attachment