Andhra HC Young Lawyer Custody Row: SCBA Expresses Shock, Seeks CJI Intervention
SCBA urged CJI intervention after alleged custody direction against a young lawyer in Andhra Pradesh High Court sparked concern over judicial conduct
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) has expressed “deep concern and shock” over a reported incident dated May 5, 2026 in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, where a young advocate was allegedly directed to be taken into judicial custody for 24 hours during court proceedings.
The incident occurred before Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao and has since triggered widespread discussion within the legal fraternity after video clips of the proceedings surfaced on social media.
According to the SCBA, the footage shows the advocate repeatedly expressing regret and seeking pardon before the Court. The Association noted that the episode has caused concern among members of the Bar across the country and has particularly unsettled young members of the legal profession.
Reiterating foundational principles governing the justice system, the SCBA said the relationship between the Bench and the Bar rests on mutual respect, dignity, patience, and institutional balance. While emphasising that courts must maintain authority and decorum, it stressed that judicial power must also reflect restraint, proportionality, fairness, and compassion, especially when dealing with young lawyers still in the early stages of practice.
The Bar body further observed that the rule of law demands both discipline in court proceedings and fairness in judicial conduct, stating that the strength of the judiciary is reflected in its patience and balanced approach.
The SCBA cautioned that any action leading to fear, humiliation, or intimidation of young advocates could adversely impact the independence of the Bar and the effective functioning of the justice delivery system.
In light of these concerns, the Association has urged the Chief Justice of India to take institutional cognizance of the matter, call for relevant records, and consider appropriate corrective and administrative measures. It stated that such steps are necessary to preserve public confidence in the judiciary and maintain healthy Bar–Bench relations.
Notably, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant has sought a report from the Andhra Pradesh High Court administration over a controversial courtroom exchange involving a lawyer, even as the direction to send the advocate to judicial custody was ultimately not enforced following intervention by the Bar.
The controversy stems from a hearing held on May 4. During the proceedings, Justice Rao reportedly rebuked the advocate appearing for the petitioner, criticising his conduct and questioning his professional standing. A video clip of the exchange, which has since circulated widely, shows the advocate apologising and pleading for leniency, stating that he was unwell and “begging for grace.” Despite this, the judge directed police personnel to take him into custody for 24 hours.
Subsequently, the Court recorded in its order that the counsel had behaved “indolently” and directed the police to take him into custody, while also asking other advocates present in court to identify themselves as witnesses to the incident. The judge further directed the lawyer to appear before the judicial registrar. However, the direction was not carried out. According to reports, members of the High Court Bar Association intervened, urging restraint, following which the situation de-escalated and the custody order was not executed. The matter was thereafter adjourned.
In a letter dated May 6, BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra flagged concerns regarding the conduct of Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, stating that the episode raises serious questions about judicial temperament, proportionality, and fairness. In its letter, the BCI expressed strong disapproval of the direction, stating that such actions could have a “chilling effect” on young members of the Bar and undermine confidence in the justice system. “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 appears prima facie grossly inappropriate,” the Council stated.
Resolution By: Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA)
Resolution Date: May 6, 2026