JUDGMENT 1. An order had been passed, by this Court, on 16.4.2012, directing the Registry to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against the counsel, Mr.V.Raghavachari, for having committed contempt of Court, on 16.4.2012, by serving an appropriate notice on him. 2. On receipt of the notice, dated 23.4.2012, issued by the Registry of this Court, Mr.V.Raghavachari, the contemner, had appeared before this Court, today. Ms.Vaigai, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr.V.Raghavachari, had submitted that the contemner had never intended to lower the dignity, decorum or the majesty of this Court, in any manner. Whatever he had said or done was only in the interest of his clients, due to the urgency involved in the matter listed before this Court. He had not intended to lower the authority of law or the majesty of this Court, or to cause obstruction to the Court proceedings. It is only an unfortunate incident that had taken place, on 16.4.2012, when the writ petition, in W.P.No.5866 of 2012, was being heard by this Court. 3. The learned counsel had further submitted that, even though it is a regrettable incident, this Court may be pleased to close the matter, without any further action being taken against the contemner, considering the amicable and healthy relationship existing between the Bar and the Bench, and in the interest of the contemner, who is a practising advocate of this Court, and in the larger interests of the judiciary, as an institution. She had further submitted that there is no doubt that the highly valued traditions and conventions of this highly reputed institution should be respected, maintained and followed by the members of the bar, and that such unsavoury incidents should not take place, in future. 4. The learned Senior Counsel, Mr.Santhana Gopalan, had submitted, on behalf of the members of the bar, that the incident that had happened, on 16.4.2012, is highly regrettable in nature and that the members of the bar should act in a responsible manner, keeping in mind the long cherished values and the traditions of this Court, in order to maintain its great reputation, dignity and honour. He had submitted that the incident may be condoned, by this Court, without taking serious note of it. Conveying the sentiments of the bar, he had further expressed the hope that such incidents would not occur, in future. He had submitted that the incident may be condoned, by this Court, without taking serious note of it. Conveying the sentiments of the bar, he had further expressed the hope that such incidents would not occur, in future. However, it is not clear as to whether the friendly advice, said to have been tendered by some of the senior members of the bar, had any sobering effect on the contemner, as seen from the reluctance shown by him in tendering an unconditional apology, for the unfortunate incident that had unfolded before this Court, on 16.4.2012, while hearing the writ petition, in W.P.No. 5866 of 2012. Instead, he was inclined to justify his behaviour, by finding unacceptable reasons for the same. His attempt to raise the issue relating to certain procedural irregularities in the contempt notice issued to him, and his attempt in trying to explain the reasons for his behaviour, does not go down well with this Court. May be, if an unconditional apology had been tendered, matters would have been laid to rest, without any further comments being made, as the frayed feelings of this Court, with regard to the behaviour of the contemner, would have been substantially smoothened. In such circumstances this Court finds it appropriate to record that, during the course of the proceedings, on 16.4.2012, it had been pointed out that such inappropriate representations made by counsels would only be counter productive to the cause of the litigants, whom they represent. Polite persuasion, which is permissible during the submission of arguments, cannot be equated with a show of unwanted aggression, as it is clear that such inappropriate behaviour would not serve the cause of justice, or the interests of the litigants. 5. The counsels, who are representing the parties before the Courts of law, ought not to cross the `Lakshman Rekha' of professional propriety, by exhibiting unbridled or unacceptable aggression, or by a pompous show of impolite behaviour, in order to please the parties, who are the litigants before the Courts of law. In fact, it is their interests, which may suffer, due to the indiscreet exercise of such unacceptable behaviour by the counsels concerned. In fact, it is their interests, which may suffer, due to the indiscreet exercise of such unacceptable behaviour by the counsels concerned. It should be clear that such condemnable behaviour, either by the members of the bar, or by the parties concerned, may not be tolerated by the Courts of law, as it would erode and undermine the majesty of the institution of judiciary, in a substantial measure, and would weaken the efficacy of the justice delivery system, as a whole. The legal system, which has been in existence to sub-serve the cause of justice, cannot be allowed to be jeopardised by the irresponsible and callous attitude of a few. 6. Of late, it is noticed, there have been many instances of breach in the approved and time tested code of conduct to be followed by the members of the bar. The fault lines are clearly visible. The cracks and crevices are widening, especially, with the ever increasing responsibility on the shoulders of the learned Judges, who are presiding over the courts of law. No doubt, there is a serious cause for concern, calling for immediate intervention, by way of drastic legal reforms and enhanced self-discipline amongst the members of the bar. Therefore, it is the bounden duty of the counsels appearing before the Courts of law, who are, primarily, officers of the Court, to represent the cause of their clients, in a fair, polite and proper manner, and to create a conducive atmosphere in the courts of law, enabling them to carry on their functions, effectively and efficiently. 7. Casting undeserved blame on the judicial officers, for the failure of the counsels in obtaining favourable orders, involving in irresponsible corridor gossips, attempting to malign the fair image of the presiding officers of the Courts concerned, participating in the increasing incidents of circulating ill-drafted petitions, with unfounded allegations, and making improper and irresponsible statements in Courts of law, and the frequent boycotting of courts, sans sufficient reasons to do so, are visible signs of a deteriorating culture. Such irresponsible acts would lead to the erosion and destruction of the faith and the confidence the common man has in the prevailing judicial system, resulting in catastrophic consequences of lawlessness and anarchy. It is a clear sign of degeneration of professional ethics and etiquette. 8. Such irresponsible acts would lead to the erosion and destruction of the faith and the confidence the common man has in the prevailing judicial system, resulting in catastrophic consequences of lawlessness and anarchy. It is a clear sign of degeneration of professional ethics and etiquette. 8. The tortious conduct of a few members of the bar may erode, denigrate and derail the legal system. However, such callous attempts, by a few, could have a major adverse impact on the entire system, resulting in serious consequences. No doubt, the vast majority of the members of the bar are maintaining very high standards of personal and professional values. It is only a few, who may be indulging in unacceptable ways, compromising the ethical values and etiquette of the noble profession of law. While the professional excellence of many of the members of the bar is praise worthy, a few of them playing truant with the system could create an erroneous impression about the legal profession, as a whole, in the eyes of the common man. The cultural degradation in the legal profession is like a deadly disease that is spreading fast. Such deterioration of cultural values and professional competence would not be in the interests of the younger generation of lawyers, who may choose to enter the noble profession of law, in the years to come. Often, there are unfortunate incidents happening, especially, at the level of the subordinate judiciary, threatening the very fabric and the foundation of the justice delivery system. 9. The cultural atrophy that is prevailing, at present, could engulf the whole system and could destroy the vitals of this great institution. Judiciary, the last resort of a common man, may loose its shine and sanctity. Then, it would not be the rule of law that would exist, instead, it would be chaos and anarchy that would be ruling the society. Let us hope that such a day never dawns. 10. Declining standards in the art of advocacy causes serious concern to all the stake holders involved in the mechanism of dispensation of justice, including the lawyers and the litigants. If this adverse and agonising trend is not reversed, with a sense of urgency, it would lead to disastrous consequences. Let us hope that such a day never dawns. 10. Declining standards in the art of advocacy causes serious concern to all the stake holders involved in the mechanism of dispensation of justice, including the lawyers and the litigants. If this adverse and agonising trend is not reversed, with a sense of urgency, it would lead to disastrous consequences. The members of the bar should not forget to remember that they are officers of the Court and that they have a legal obligation to aid the courts of law in performing their functions, in a smooth and efficient manner. Further, it is the primary duty of the bar to keep a constant vigil in upholding the dignity and the decorum of the judiciary by cherishing, nurturing, preserving and practising the age old traditions of this great institution, which are worthy of emulation. 11. A concerted effort has to be made to arrest the contagious illness before it becomes cancerous and attains dangerous and unmanageable proportions, like a bubonic plague. There should, probably, be an open public debate, involving all the stake holders, who may have a say in the system of dispensation of justice. Unless we set our house in order, we may fail to keep the promises we had made when we gave to ourselves the sacred document called the Constitution of India, containing more than a million dreams. 12. In O.P.Sharma Vs. High Court of Punjab and Haryana (2011) 6 SCC 86 , the Supreme Court had reiterated the role of lawyers in the administration of justice. It had been held that a lawyer cannot be a mere mouthpiece of his client. He is under an obligation to uphold the rule of law and to ensure that the judicial system functions to its full potential. A lawyer should be dignified in his dealings with the Court, his fellow lawyers and the litigants. He should have integrity in abundance and should never do anything that erodes his credibility. He should faithfully abide by the standards of professional conduct and etiquette, prescribed by the Bar Council of India. He has an important social duty to perform, as an officer of the Court. 13. In a recent decision, a Division Bench of this Court, in S.Padma and another Vs. He should faithfully abide by the standards of professional conduct and etiquette, prescribed by the Bar Council of India. He has an important social duty to perform, as an officer of the Court. 13. In a recent decision, a Division Bench of this Court, in S.Padma and another Vs. The Chief Justice, High Court of Madras 2012-2-L.W. 267, had held that an advocate, who is an officer of the Court, is bound to respect the Court and to maintain its dignity, decorum and majesty. 14. While dealing with the issues relating to the unfortunate incidents that had taken place in the campus of the Madras High Court, on 19.2.2009, a Division Bench of this Court, in Women Lawyers Association Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2009) 7 MLJ 1233 , had held that the Court would be failing in its duty if appropriate measures are not taken to protect its status, glory and dignity and thereby, instill confidence in the minds of everyone that the judiciary will uphold its authority and status at times when people cry for justice and that it would not leave any stone unturned in order to achieve the said goal. 15. In his book titled `Dynamic Lawyering’, Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer has stated that lawyers are social engineers and are hallowed partners in securing a world order, a cosmos without chaos and an international order where jurisprudence never dwindles into the vanishing point. The Bar should be at war with injustice, as an equal partner in the judicial process. 16. Unless the long cherished traditions and conventions of this court are jealously guarded, respected and followed to their last details, the process of dispensation of justice may be pushed to the brink of disaster. Courts are not expected to tolerate uncouth and unacceptable behaviour from the members of the bar. This Court may be failing in its duty if it does not express a word of caution in such matters. Further, it may be mistaken to be a tacit sanction or a weakness shown in the performance of its primary duty of rendering justice, without fear or favour, ill-will or affection. 17. Muted murmurs are heard from some segments of the society, reflecting their concern regarding the falling standards and the lack of professionalism amongst the members of the bar, in general. 17. Muted murmurs are heard from some segments of the society, reflecting their concern regarding the falling standards and the lack of professionalism amongst the members of the bar, in general. Therefore, at this juncture, there is an emergent need for intense introspection before rigorous remedial measures are initiated to curb and to contain the malaise. Let the house be set in order before it becomes a loud chorus, and before it is too late to redeem the lost prestige of the noble profession. It is said that the Courts of law are the last resort of a common man on the streets. Let there be nothing done, by deeds or by words, to belie the high hopes the people of this nation have on this `last bastion' of hope – the judiciary. Let there be a clear and definite resolve to revive and to restore the legal system to its old glory and to make it march forward in its quest for justice. 18. Unless drastic steps are taken to enhance the waning image of the bar it would lead to the declining efficacy of the judiciary and the resultant effect may not be good for both. A myopic vision that we seem to have, in dealing with the malignancy, may not be the answer. Nor can we don the attitude of an ostrich wishing the problems away, without addressing the core issues. A far sighted approach may be the answer to curb the growing menace. The right answer must be found today, for tomorrow may be too late. 19. Due to the persistent persuasion of the learned counsels appearing before this Court, and in order to foster harmony between the bar and the bench, in performing the sacred duty of serving the society at large, this Court finds it fit to close the present contempt petition, with the fond hope that such inappropriate behaviour would not be repeated, and with a serious note of caution that such unacceptable behaviour may not be tolerated or condoned by the Courts of law, in future, especially, with the ever increasing burden and responsibility in the performance of their onerous duty of dispensation of justice. Even though the inappropriate behaviour of the contemner is condemnable, keeping in mind the future professional prospects of the contemner, who is a practicing advocate of this Court, the contempt petition is closed, without any further orders being passed, taking on record the Memo filed by the contemner, dated 5.6.2012.