Delhi lawyers have refused to recall their indefinite strike starting September 8, even after BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra’s appeal. The strike continues over opposition to police witnesses deposing via video conferencing.
New Delhi: On September 6, the Bar Council of India (BCI) has appealed to the coordination committees of all district bar associations in Delhi to withdraw or postpone their proposed indefinite strike starting from September 8.
The strike call came after lawyers strongly objected to a recent move allowing police personnel to present evidence virtually from police stations.
Earlier this week, on Thursday, the coordination committee condemned a letter from the police commissioner’s office to principal district and sessions judges regarding the proposal.
Calling it against earlier assurances, the committee had announced that lawyers across Delhi’s district courts would intensify their protest and go on an indefinite strike from Monday.
Responding to this, BCI Chairman and senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra issued a detailed letter.
He said,
“I respect the committee for its efforts in safeguarding the rights of litigants and maintaining the independence of the Bar.”
He also acknowledged the issue raised by lawyers, adding,
“By raising concerns on the issue of police witnesses deposing from police stations through video conferencing, the committee had highlighted a genuine concern. And as per our information, a meeting of the committee was held with the Union Home Minister a few weeks back.”
The BCI letter explained the sequence of events. On July 4, the Delhi High Court issued a notification introducing a video conferencing procedure and designating prisons, forensic departments, prosecution offices, and police stations as approved venues.
Following this, on August 13, the Lieutenant Governor (LG) notified all police stations in Delhi as designated places for recording evidence via video conferencing.
This move faced massive opposition from the legal fraternity. Lawyers launched a six-day strike in August, which was later suspended after the Union Home Minister assured that their concerns would be considered with an “open mind.”
The Delhi Police commissioner’s office had also clarified that the order would not be implemented without consulting all stakeholders.
Despite this assurance, on September 4, the commissioner’s office issued a new circular. Clarifying its scope, the circular stated that only formal police witnesses would testify through video conferencing.
Material police witnesses would continue to appear in court physically. It also added that if the defense requested the physical presence of a police witness, the presiding judge could consider the request and allow examination in person.
The BCI highlighted this point, stating,
“These provisions show that the concerns of the bar have been addressed and a substantive part of the demand has been fulfilled.”
Mishra stressed that repeated strikes were harming not only lawyers but also litigants. He wrote,
“Please remember that is the fourth or fifth occasion (only in 2025) that the committee has given a call for an indefinite strike? The Supreme Court, as we all know, has held that lawyers have no right to strike or call for a boycott of courts.”
He further explained that only statutory bar councils had the legal authority to regulate lawyers under the Advocates Act. Strikes or abstentions without such sanction risked damaging the credibility of the profession. He reminded lawyers that,
“In the present circumstances, the more constructive way forward would be to build upon the concessions already secured and to discuss the matter with the highest representative bodies of the profession.”
Making his appeal, the BCI Chairman wrote,
“Therefore, I request the coordination committee to defer/recall the proposed strike, and I invite it to participate in a joint meeting with the Bar Council of India and the State Bar Council of Delhi on Monday.”
He said the meeting would give lawyers the correct platform to deliberate and clarify their concerns.
“Please remember that is the fourth or fifth occasion (only in 2025) that the committee has given a call for an indefinite strike? The Supreme Court, as we all know, has held that lawyers have no right to strike or call for a boycott of courts.”
The BCI also emphasized that joining the meeting would help safeguard the profession’s image. It stated,
“Therefore, I request the coordination committee to defer/recall the proposed strike, and I invite it to participate in a joint meeting with the Bar Council of India and the State Bar Council of Delhi on Monday.”
Mishra underlined that this would protect litigants from unnecessary hardship while preserving the dignity of lawyers.
He added,
“This constructive step will not only carry forward the substantive progress already achieved but also give the bar its strongest platform for ensuring that its voice is heard and acted upon and carries weight.”
He further warned that frequent strikes could harm public perception, saying,
“would not expose itself to mockery or criticism, nor create an impression among the public that the Delhi bar associations resort to strikes repeatedly, even for matters that may appear to be petty or without sufficient cause.”
Mishra concluded that the credibility of lawyers must remain intact, writing,
“By avoiding such perceptions, the dignity and credibility of the bar will be preserved in the eyes of litigants and society at large.”
The controversy began after the LG’s August 13 notification designating police stations as video conferencing venues. This led to a strike from August 22 to 28.
The strike was suspended after a meeting with Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s representative and the police commissioner’s assurance that the rule would not be enforced without wider consultation.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Delhi riots case
