Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Gandhian Scholar

Gandhi Research Foundation, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09415777229, 094055338








 The judgment of the High Court in the case of the Satyagrahi lawyers is, to say the least, highly unsatisfactory. It has shirked the issue. The logical outcome of the judgment should have been punishment and not a postponement of it. The lawyers in question had shown no repentance. So far as the public know, they will be ready to offer civil disobedience should the occasion arise. The issue having been raised, the lawyers did not ask for mercy but a clear decision. As it is, they do not know where they are. The learned Judges have laid down principles of legal conduct which, in our humble opinion, are open to question. For instance, what is the meaning of "those who live by the law must keep the law"? If it means that no lawyer may ever commit a civil breach without incurring the displeasure of the Court, it means utter stagnation. Lawyers are the persons most able to appreciate the dangers of bad legislation and it must be with them a sacred duty by committing civil breach to prevent a criminal breach. Lawyers should be guardians of law and liberty and as such are interested in keeping the statute-book of the country 'pure and undefiled'. But the Judges of the Bombay High Court have presented to them a mercenary view of their profession and have even confounded the functions of judges and lawyers. The only escape from the intolerable situation created by the In summing up, the Chief Justice in his judgment said: ‘I wish to make it perfectly clear that, apart from any other considerations, those who are enrolled as advocates or pleaders of this High Court or of the District Courts cannot serve two masters. It may be that after due consideration of this expression of our opinion, the respondents may see the force of it. We have no desire to deal harshly with them and for the present we shall content ourselves with giving them the warning. We do so because we are told that the Satyagraha Sabha since the riots of April has been quiescent. Whether we shall take any further action depends entirely on the development, if any, of the Satyagraha movement, so that these notices will be adjourned with leave to the Advocate-General and the respondents to move for their restoration to the Board should occasion arise.’ ” judgment is for the respondents to have the case restored to the Board, reargued, and to ask for a final decision. Fortunately, the Judges have left the course open to the satyagrahi lawyers.

Views: 16


You need to be a member of Peace and Collaborative Development Network to add comments!

Join Peace and Collaborative Development Network

Sponsored Link

Please Pay What You Can to Support PCDN

Please consider Paying What You Can to help PCDN grow. We encourage you to consider any amount from $1 and up. Read the SUPPORT page prior to making a payment to see PCDN's impact and how your payment will help.

Sponsored Link

Translate This Page


PCDN Guidelines and Share Pages

By using this site you're agreeing to the terms of use as outlined in the community guidelines (in particular PCDN is an open network indexed by Google and users should review the privacy options). Please note individual requests for funding or jobs are NOT permitted on the network.

Click BELOW to share site resources Bookmark and Share
or Share on LINKEDIN




© 2016   Created by Craig Zelizer.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service