ORDER
Rama Jois, J.
1. To-day when the cases posted before the Court are called, no Advocate is present and no representation is made seeking adjournment of any of the cases posted before the Court. However, a resolution passed by the Bar Association, Bangalore, deciding to abstain from appearing in the Courts commencing from to-day for an indefinite period, as a mark of protest against the attrocities alleged to have been committed against a Member of the Bar hailing from Kerala State, who had come to Bangalore for discharging his professional duties, at a City Police Station, as set out in a complaint sent by the said Advocate to the Bar Association and also the subsequent death of the said Advocate under mysterious circumstances, has been sent by the Association, to Hon’ble the Chief Justice.
2. On an earlier occasion, when as a result of the call given by the Bangalore Bar Association to boycott the Courts on 10-2-1983 in protest against police atrocities against a lawyer in Uttar Pradesh, no lawyer attended the Courts, this Court has stated as under: 1983(2) KLC 54-55
“The case posted to-day are called. No advocate is present. It was reported in the Press that all the advocates are boycotting this Court pursuant to a resolution passed by the Advocates’ Association to register their protest against some police atrocities against members of the Bar at Azamgrah in Uttar Pradesh.
2. Whether absence of Counsel in the Court by resorting to this form of protest, is justified at all is a matter for serious consideration. Oh this occasion, I am remainded of the words of advice given by Dr. Ambedkar, one of the main architects of our Constitution, in his speech made in the Constituent Assembly on 29th November 1949, moving the resolution for the adoption of the Constiution. He said :
“If we wish to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact, what must we do ? The first thing in my judgment we must do is to hold fast to constitutional methods of achieving our social and economic objectives… When there was no way left for constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives, there was a great deal of justification for unconstitutional methods. But where Constitutional methods are open, there can be no justification for these unconstitutional methods These are nothing but the Grammar of Anarchy and the sooner they are abandoned, the better for us”. (See : the Framing of India’s Constitution, Vol. IV, B. Shiva Rao, page 943)
Further it appears to me that the absence of counsel in the circumstance may not constitute a good and sufficient reason for adjourning the case. But, whatever that may be, the fact remains that no advocate is present and if I were to proceed to pass any order ex parte or dismiss the case ex parte, it is sure to result in hardship and injury to the litigants.
3. In the circumstances, I am constrained to adjourn all the cases to 14-2-1983 so that litigants may not be put to any hardship or injury.
A copy of this order shall be communicated to the President, Advocates’ Association, Bangalore.”
Thereafter, till now such a method had not been resorted to. As once again the Bar Association has resorted to that method, I am constrained to reiterate the same on this occasion. It may be that there is full justification for the Members of the Bar to lodge a strong protest against the incident, but having regard to the weighty observations made by Dr. Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly, extracted above, it appears to me that in order to register protest against any incident of matter, there are well known constitutional methods of holding a meeting and passing a resolution or going in a peaceful procession or writing articles in the Press and the like. But the consequences of protest against alleged executive high handedness in the form of bundhs or boycotting of the Courts, falls on the administration of justice, in that, the working of the Courts gets paralysed and rendering of justice gets delayed and as a result the litigants suffer. The chariot of administration of justice can move only on two wheels, namely, the Bench and the Bar. If the members of the Bar do not function, whatever may be the reason, the administration of justice comes to a grinding halt. Therefore, the matter for serious consideration by the members of the Bar Association is, whether, having due regard to the exhortation by Dr. Ambedkar, it is not appropriate that they should resort to constitutional methods for registering their protest against any matter, instead of resorting to the bundhs of the Courts and thereby set a good example for emulation by other Sections of the society?
However, in view of the resolution passed by the Bar Association and also bearing in mind the injury that is likely to be caused to the litigants by passing any ex parte order, I hereby order that all the cases posted to-day be adjourned to 2nd September, 1987, reluctantly and not without expressing my anguish.