HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA BAR ASSOCIATION AND ANR. vs STATE OF MEGHALAYA
- Court
- High Court of Meghalaya
2026:MLHC:968-DB
Serial No.08
Daily List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP (C) No.350/2026
Date of order: 01.09.2026
1. High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association, represented by its
President/Secretary General.
2. Shillong Bar Association, represented by its
President/Secretary. ..... Petitioners
Vs.
1. State of Meghalaya, represented by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Meghalaya.
2. The Bar Council of Meghalaya, Annex Building, High Court of
Meghalaya, MG Road, Shillong, Meghalaya-793001.
3. Bar Council of India, 21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area,
New Delhi-110002. ..... Respondents
Coram:
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioners : None
For the Respondents : Mr. A. Kumar, Advocate General with
Mr. A.S. Dey, GA
Mr. J.N. Rynjah, GA
i) Whether approved for reporting in No
Law journals etc.:
ii) Whether approved for publication
in press: Yes
Page 1 of 6
2026:MLHC:968-DB
JUDGMENT: ( per the Hon’ble, the Chief Justice): (Oral)
The aforesaid petition was registered pursuant to a
th
representation dated 29 July, 2026, submitted by the Secretary
General, High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association on behalf of
the High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association and the Shillong
Bar Association. In the said representation, the petitioners had
highlighted the manner in which an Advocate was apprehended
by non-State actors from his professional chamber and thereafter,
subjected to physical assault and paraded from his chamber at
Keating Road, Shillong to Sadar Police Station. The grievance of
the petitioners essentially was that non-State actors had taken
law into their own hands, whereas the police abdicated its role by
not apprehending or taking action against the non-State actors or
in stopping the assault on the Advocate. Learned Senior counsel
appearing for the petitioners had placed reliance on the judgment
of the Apex Court in Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India
reported in (2018) 9 SCC 501 , in support of his submission that,
actions by non-State actors as was done could not be
countenanced. It was further submitted that in Tehseen S.
case (supra), the Apex Court had issued several
Poonawalla’s
Page 2 of 6
2026:MLHC:968-DB
guidelines i.e., preventive, remedial and punitive to be
taken/followed by the State Governments. Since no FIR was
registered against non-State actors for assaulting and parading
the Advocate, the aforesaid representation came to be made.
2. Mr. Kumar, learned Advocate General had assured that
appropriate steps will be taken at the earliest in connection with
the said incident and accordingly, an FIR was registered during
the course of hearing of the petition. Learned Advocate General
also assured that steps will be taken by the police to ensure strict
compliance of the directions given by the Apex Court in Tehseen
S. Poonawalla’s case (supra). We were also informed by Mr. Paul
that appropriate steps will be taken by the Bar Council of
Meghalaya as well as the Shillong Bar Association, qua the
Advocate on a complaint by the concerned complainant.
rd
3. On 3 August, 2026, Mr. Paul assured that a drop box
facility will be made mandatory in all Bar Associations as well as
in the Bar Council of Meghalaya office, at the earliest, so that
grievances pertaining to sexual harassment of women Advocates
and interns if any, could be addressed.
Page 3 of 6
2026:MLHC:968-DB
4. Today, learned Advocate General states that the
investigation qua the non-State actors, who assaulted and
paraded the Advocate is in progress and assures that the same
will be taken into its logical end.
5. It further appears that Mr. Gautam, Secretary General,
High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association has filed an affidavit
st
dated 1 September, 2026. In the said affidavit, it is stated that in
th
the executive meeting of the Association held on 10 August,
2026, the Committee of the High Court of Meghalaya Bar
Association adopted the resolutions passed by the Bar Council of
Meghalaya and thereafter, have taken steps in implementing the
same.
6. The Bar Council of Meghalaya has also filed their affidavit
st
of compliance dated 31 August, 2026. The said affidavit has
been filed by Mr. Gregory Syngkrem, Honorary Secretary of the
Bar Council of Meghalaya. In the said affidavit, it is stated that
st
the Bar Council of Meghalaya in its meeting dated 31 July,
2026, has issued directions to all Bar Associations in Meghalaya
to comply with the same.
Page 4 of 6
2026:MLHC:968-DB
7. It further appears that the Bar Council of Meghalaya has
also set up a physical drop box in the office of the Bar Council of
Meghalaya and has implemented an online complaint portal on
the website of the Bar Council of Meghalaya and procedure has
been set out for filing an online complaint. The affidavit further
lists the steps taken by various Bar Associations, pursuant to the
directions issued by the Bar Council of Meghalaya, in terms of the
directions given by them. It thus appears that most of the Bar
Associations have complied with the directions issued by the Bar
Council of Meghalaya.
8. As far as allegations of sexual harassment made against
the lawyer is concerned, it appears that the Shillong Bar
Association has suspended him. As far as the complaint made to
the Bar Council of Meghalaya against the Advocate is concerned,
it appears that the said complaint has been registered by the Bar
Council of Meghalaya as DC Enquiry and appropriate steps are
being taken in accordance with the Bar Council of India Rules.
Page 5 of 6
2026:MLHC:968-DB
9. Thus, we find that the Bar Council of Meghalaya has taken
positive and adequate steps to address grievances in future, if
any.
10. In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives for further
consideration in the petition. The petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
(W. Diengdoh) (Revati Mohite Dere)
Judge Chief Justice
Meghalaya
01.09.2026
“ Lam DR-PS”
Page 6 of 6
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY
Date: 2026.09.02 16:25:47 IST