Delhi High Court transfers case after lawyer's repeated 'I cry my beloved justice system' and walkout, calls it misconduct

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 6 November 2026

Case: Court on its own motion v. Mr. R.P. Luthra, Advocate
Court: High Court of Delhi
Bench: Justice Neena Bansal Krishna
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 762
Decided: 3 June 2024
Statutes: Advocates Act, 1961
Source: LiveLaw

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In Court on its own motion v. Mr. R.P. Luthra, Advocate, the Delhi High Court (Justice Neena Bansal Krishna) on 2024-06-03 transferred a case after an advocate repeatedly stated 'I cry my beloved justice system' and walked out, deeming it professional misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

An advocate's repeated use of disrespectful language towards the court and walking out of proceedings constitutes professional misconduct, warranting transfer of the case to maintain judicial decorum and ensure fair proceedings.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates must maintain decorum and respect towards the court; disruptive behavior can lead to cases being transferred or disciplinary action. Litigants should be aware that their chosen counsel's misconduct may impact the continuity of their case before a particular bench.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Disruptive conduct by an advocate, such as walking out of court, is professional misconduct.
2Using phrases like 'I cry my beloved justice system' repeatedly can be deemed disrespectful.
3Courts may transfer cases to another bench to address advocate misconduct and ensure orderly proceedings.

The Legal Issue The Delhi High Court addressed an incident where an advocate, Mr. R.P. Luthra, repeatedly uttered the phrase 'I cry my beloved justice system' and walked out of the courtroom during proceedings. The court considered whether such conduct amounted to professional misconduct and what action should be taken to ensure the orderly administration of justice.

Court's Reasoning Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that the advocate's conduct was highly objectionable and amounted to professional misconduct. The court noted that the advocate had a history of similar behavior, including walking out of court and making disrespectful remarks. The judge stated that such actions were an attempt to browbeat the court and disrupt proceedings. To maintain judicial decorum and ensure that the litigant's case was heard fairly without prejudice due to the advocate's conduct, the court decided to transfer the case to another bench.

What Follows The Delhi High Court directed the Registrar General to transfer the case, Court on its own motion v. Mr. R.P. Luthra, Advocate, to another bench for further proceedings. The court also indicated that the advocate's conduct would be considered in the context of professional misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961.