ANGRY WITH CJ, SR ADVOCATE DHAVAN QUITS SC PRACTICE
Eminent constitutional expert and senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan on Monday decided to quit his practice in the Supreme Court, accusing CJI Dipak Misra of “humiliating him in court”. His decision comes few days after the the CJ criticised him Dhavan for “raising” his voice.
After the humiliating end to the Delhi case, I have decided to give up court practice. You are entitled to take back the senior gown conferred on me, though I would like to keep it for memory and services rendered — RAJEEV DHAVAN,
senior lawyer
In unprecedented and dramatic turn of events, eminent constitutional expert and senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan on Monday accused Chief Justice Dipak Misra of “humiliating him in court” and announced that he will not again practice in the Supreme Court.
Mr Dhavan, 71, in a two-sentence letter to the CJI, said: “After the humiliating end to the Delhi case, I have decided to give up court practice. You are entitled to take back the senior gown conferred on me, though I would like to keep it for memory and services rendered.”
Mr Dhavan’s decision to quit court practice comes a few days after Chief Justice Misra took exception to senior lawyers, including Mr Dhavan, raising their voice to allegedly browbeat judges during a hearing on appeals filed by the Delhi government in its power tussle against the Centre’s representative and LG Anil Baijal.
On December 6, an angry CJI had observed, “What happened on Wednesday (in Delhi-Centre case) was atrocious and what happened a day before (in the Ayodhya case) was more atrocious. Come what may, shouting in the courtroom will not be tolerated at any cost.”
Chief Justice Misra had said, “Lawyers are called ministers of justice. Unfortunately, a small group of lawyers think they can raise their voice. You can argue with authority and conviction. Raising your voice shows inadequacy and incompetence.” “If the Supreme Court Bar Association does not regulate such members, we will be forced to regulate them,” the CJI also said.
“When lawyers argue in a manner not in tune with Constitutional language, we will tolerate it, but for how long? If the Bar does not regulate itself, we will be compelled to regulate,” he had said.