The Supreme Court has taken cognisance of the controversy arising from proceedings before the Andhra Pradesh High Court in which a young advocate was directed to be taken into judicial custody for 24 hours.
The matter was registered as a writ petition after the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) passed a resolution and submitted a formal representation requesting Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant to take institutional cognisance of the incident and consider appropriate corrective and administrative measures to preserve public confidence in the judicial system, as well as maintain healthy relations between the Bar and the Bench.
The SCBA had recently expressed its deep concern and shock over the incident, which reportedly occurred on May 5, 2026, before the single-judge Bench of Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, where a young advocate appearing in a writ petition was allegedly rebuked during the hearing and directed to be taken into police custody for 24 hours.
Video recordings of the proceedings later circulated widely on social media platforms, showing the advocate repeatedly expressing regret and seeking pardon before the High Court.
The judicial order reportedly recorded that the counsel had behaved improperly during the proceedings and directed police authorities to take him into custody. However, the direction was subsequently recalled following intervention by members of the Bar and the custody order was ultimately not executed.
Expressing concern over the incident, the SCBA stated that the episode had caused widespread unease within the legal fraternity, particularly among young lawyers at the beginning of their legal careers. The association emphasised that the institutional relationship between the Bench and the Bar was founded upon mutual respect, dignity, restraint and professional balance and that advocates, as officers of the court, formed an integral component of the administration of justice.
While recognising the authority of constitutional courts to maintain discipline and decorum during judicial proceedings, the association stressed that the exercise of judicial powers must conform to principles of proportionality, fairness, procedural restraint and constitutional accountability.
It further observed that judicial temperament and institutional patience assume greater significance while dealing with young members of the legal profession who were still in the formative stages of practice. The SCBA also expressed apprehension that actions perceived as humiliating, intimidating or disproportionate may adversely affect the independence of the Bar and create a chilling effect upon young practitioners appearing before courts.
Following the controversy, CJI Kant reportedly sought a report from the Andhra Pradesh High Court administration regarding the incident.
The incident has also drawn criticism from the Bar Council of India (BCI). In a letter dated May 6, BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra raised concerns regarding the conduct of Justice Rao, stating that the episode raised serious issues relating to judicial temperament, proportionality and fairness. The Council strongly criticised the direction to place the advocate in custody, observing that such actions could create an adverse effect on young members of the legal profession and erode confidence in the justice system.
It pointed out that an advocate, particularly a young member of the profession, may be corrected, cautioned, or proceeded against in accordance with law. However, sending a young advocate to judicial custody for 24 hours in such a manner appeared prima facie grossly inappropriate, BCI added.
The post Supreme Court takes cognisance of Andhra Pradesh High Court order sending junior lawyer to 24-hour custody appeared first on India Legal.