Calcutta, 7th September 2024: The Calcutta High Court recently declined a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directives for a law protecting advocates from harassment, violence, and intimidation.
The Bench, headed by Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, made it clear that it is not the court’s role to legislate but rather interpret the law.
The petition was filed by a non-profit organization and a lawyer who sought legal measures to safeguard advocates.
They asked for protection to ensure that lawyers can carry out their duties without fear or interference. However, the court emphasized that creating such laws is the responsibility of the State government, not the judiciary.
“This court cannot legislate. The court can only interpret the law,” the Bench stated, pointing out that it is up to the West Bengal government to introduce necessary legislative measures.
The court referred to the example of the Rajasthan Advocates’ Protection Act, 2023, which was implemented in Rajasthan. They explained that West Bengal has the choice to either enact its own laws or adopt a similar Central law.
Although the High Court refused to entertain the PIL, it gave the petitioners the freedom to take up their concerns directly with the West Bengal government. “We grant liberty to the writ petitioner to pursue the writ petition before the State of West Bengal,” the Court noted, suggesting that the State might consider the petitioners’ representation if they submit it.
The petitioners had also requested the court to direct the State to establish a dedicated task force or monitoring committee for the safety of advocates.
Additionally, they asked for the installation of CCTV cameras in high-risk areas and the creation of a specialized cell for investigating threats and harassment against lawyers.
While the court acknowledged the petitioners’ concerns, it remained firm on its stance that the judiciary cannot force the government to enact laws.
Instead, the court directed the petitioners to present their requests before the State government and urged the West Bengal State Bar Council to submit its recommendations to the government for the creation of an appropriate law.
This ruling has come at a time when several States, like Rajasthan, have already enacted laws aimed at protecting advocates.
The Rajasthan Advocates’ Protection Act, of 2023, sets an example by introducing stringent measures to ensure the safety and security of lawyers in the State. The petitioners, however, hope that West Bengal will soon follow suit to safeguard the legal fraternity.
The advocates representing the petitioners, including Sandip Ray, S Srivastava, Shaondeep Chakraborty, Madhurima Sarkar, Aishwarya Nanda, and Urmi Biswas, strongly argued that lawyers face increasing instances of threats and violence.
They emphasized the importance of legal protection to allow advocates to perform their professional duties without intimidation.
On the other hand, Deputy Solicitor General of India Rajdeep Majumder and Advocate Samrat Ghosh appeared for the Union of India. The court reiterated that the legislative process must be initiated by the State and not imposed by judicial intervention.
The decision by the Calcutta High Court underscores the constitutional separation of powers, highlighting the judiciary’s role in interpreting laws while leaving the task of law-making to the legislative bodies.
As a result, the next step in the process will depend on the response of the West Bengal government and the representation made by the petitioners to push for a law that protects the legal community.