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 Serial No.08 Daily List 2026:MLHC:968-DB JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble, the Chief Justice): (Oral) The aforesaid petition was registered pursuant to a representation dated 29th 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. Poonawalla’s case (supra), the Apex Court had issued several 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. 3. On 3rd 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. 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 dated 1st September, 2026. In the said affidavit, it is stated that in the executive meeting of the Association held on 10th 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 of compliance dated 31st 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 the Bar Council of Meghalaya in its meeting dated 31st July, 2026, has issued directions to all Bar Associations in Meghalaya to comply with the same. 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. 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” 2026:MLHC:968-DB Digitally signed by LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY Date: 2026.09.02 16:25:47 IST