Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court has observed that once a Bench has indicated its inclination and requested counsel to refrain from making further submissions, such direction must be respected, as continued insistence thereafter serves no purpose and affects the decorum of proceedings.

“Once the Court has indicated its mind and requested the counsel to refrain from further submissions, the same is expected to be respected. Orders are passed by the Court only after due consideration. The Court is always mindful of the submissions advanced and does not dismiss the matters without careful examination. Continued insistence thereafter, especially after the Court expressed its inclination, serves no purpose and affects the decorum of proceedings,” the Court stated in an order passed on October 28.

“There needs to be a balance in the duty that advocate has towards his/her client and the Court.The orderly functioning of the Court is best ensured when both the Bench and the Bar move in symphony and mutual respect,” the Court added.

The observation came from a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, which was dealing with a miscellaneous application filed by the Uttarakhand State Election Commission (SEC) seeking modification of an earlier order that had imposed a cost of ₹2 lakh on it while dismissing its Special Leave Petition.

Background

The SEC had approached the Supreme Court challenging an interim order of the Uttarakhand High Court which stayed a clarification issued by the Commission allowing candidates with names in multiple electoral rolls to contest panchayat elections. During the hearing of the SLP, the Bench had indicated six times that it was not inclined to interfere with the High Court's order. Despite this, the counsel appearing for the SEC reportedly continued to insist on making submissions and pressed for the matter to be heard further.

Taking note of this conduct, the Court had dismissed the SLP with a cost of ₹2 lakh to be deposited with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.

Later, the SEC filed a miscellaneous application seeking to recall the cost and expunge the adverse remarks recorded in the order. The counsel also tendered an unconditional apology and expressed regret for the incident. Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, and Advocate Vipin Nair, the President of the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association, also were present before the Court, assuring the bench that the counsel would not repeat the conduct.

Accepting the apology, the Bench decided to delete the observations made in the earlier order as well as the cost imposed, while cautioning that such conduct should not recur.

Case Title: STATE ELECTION COMMISSION Versus SHAKTI SINGH BHARTHWAL AND ANR.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1038

Click here to read the order