June 25, 2025 | Kochi, The Kerala High Court has sought a response from the Bar Council of Kerala in a petition filed by Advocate Beyline Das, who is challenging the disciplinary action initiated against him following allegations of assaulting a junior woman lawyer in his office.
Justice N Nagaresh issued notice to the Bar Council and posted the matter for further hearing on July 1, 2025.
Background of the Case
The controversy stems from an incident on May 13, 2025, when a junior woman lawyer working in Das’s office in Thiruvananthapuram lodged a complaint alleging that Das had slapped her during an argument, resulting in serious injuries to her face.
Based on the complaint, the Vanchiyoor Police registered an FIR against Das under the following provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023:
- Section 126(2) – Wrongful restraint
- Section 74 – Assault on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty
- Section 115(2) – Causing hurt
Das was arrested shortly after the incident and was later granted bail by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Trivandrum, on May 19.
Disciplinary Action and Suspension
In response to the incident:
- The Trivandrum Bar Association conducted an internal inquiry and suspended Das from its membership.
- The Bar Council of Kerala also initiated suo motu disciplinary proceedings, and passed an interim suspension order on May 14, restraining Das from appearing before any court, tribunal, or authority pending completion of disciplinary inquiry.
Grounds of Challenge
In his petition filed through Advocate Akhil Suresh, Das contended:
- The Kerala Bar Council’s tenure ended in November 2023, and no special committee was constituted under the Advocates Act, 1961 post May 2024, thereby rendering it legally defunct.
- He relied on the High Court’s ruling in Yeshwanth Shenoy v. Bar Council of Kerala, where a Division Bench held that the Bar Council had ceased to exist in law and could not exercise statutory powers.
- The interim suspension under Section 35 of the Advocates Act is beyond the Bar Council’s powers, as only the Disciplinary Committee can take such action after a proper inquiry.
- The order was passed without affording him an opportunity to be heard, and even before referral to the Disciplinary Committee.
- Forcing him to submit a written defence before completion of the criminal investigation would violate Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which guarantees the right against self-incrimination.
Reliefs Sought
Advocate Das has sought the following from the Court:
- Quashing of the suspension order issued by the Bar Council of Kerala.
- Cancellation of the show-cause notice and the referral to the Disciplinary Committee.
- Permission to resume legal practice pending completion of criminal proceedings.
- A stay on all disciplinary actions initiated by the Bar Council.
The Court will now consider whether the Kerala Bar Council had the jurisdiction to initiate disciplinary proceedings in light of its allegedly expired tenure, and whether due process was followed in suspending the advocate.
