

Key Points
A viral courtroom video shows Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao rebuking a young advocate and directing police to take him into custody for 24 hours.
The Bar Council of India and Supreme Court Bar Association have called the episode “deeply disturbing” and sought institutional intervention from the Chief Justice of India.
The custody order was later not enforced after intervention by the Andhra Pradesh High Court Bar Association. The CJI has sought a report on the matter.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) on 6 May 2026 wrote to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant seeking urgent intervention over the conduct of Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao from Andhra Pradesh High Court, who directed that a young advocate be taken into custody for 24 hours during court proceedings on 4 May.
The controversy erupted after a video clip of the courtroom exchange went viral on social media. The incident took place during the hearing of a petition challenging the issuance of a Look Out Circular and the impounding of a passport.
During the proceedings, Justice Rao rebuked the advocate appearing for the petitioner after the lawyer failed to produce a copy of an earlier order in a similar matter. The judge accused the counsel of behaving “indolently” and questioned whether he considered himself a “great Senior Advocate”.
In the video, the advocate is seen apologising repeatedly with folded hands, saying he was in pain and “begging for grace”. Despite this, the judge directed police personnel to take the lawyer into custody for 24 hours. “Call the police. You go and file appeal,” Justice Rao could be heard saying. He also reportedly suggested that the advocate could “go and make a dharna at the Bar Council”.
The court further asked lawyers present in the courtroom to identify themselves as witnesses to the conduct of the advocate. Police personnel later entered the courtroom following the oral direction.
However, the order was ultimately not enforced after members of the Andhra Pradesh High Court Bar Association intervened and urged restraint. According to reports, the direction was recalled before it could be signed and the matter was adjourned until after the summer vacation.
In a letter to the CJI, BCI Chairman and senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra described the incident as “deeply disturbing” and said it raised grave concerns regarding “judicial temperament, proportionality, fairness, and the dignity of the Bar”.
“We don't find anything wrong with the conduct of the young Lawyer,” the BCI said in its representation. “The dignity of the Court is not enhanced when a lawyer is made to beg for grace in open Court and is still sent to custody for a procedural lapse.”
The Council argued that while advocates may be corrected or proceeded against according to law, sending a young lawyer to custody over a procedural lapse appeared “prima facie grossly inappropriate”.
The letter further warned that such incidents could have a “chilling effect” on young lawyers and undermine confidence in the justice system. It requested the CJI to call for the video recording of the proceedings and consider administrative action, including withdrawal of judicial work from the judge pending review, transfer, and judicial training on court management and Bar–Bench relations.
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) also issued a resolution expressing “deep concern and shock” over the incident. The SCBA said that judicial powers must reflect “restraint, proportionality, fairness, and compassion”, especially while dealing with young advocates who are “still learning and evolving in the profession”.
The association cautioned that actions causing “fear, humiliation, or intimidation” among junior lawyers could adversely affect the independence of the Bar and the functioning of the justice delivery system. It further urged the CJI to take “appropriate institutional cognizance” of the matter.
CJI Surya Kant has now sought a report from the Andhra Pradesh High Court administration on the episode. Senior lawyers across the country also reacted sharply to the video, with concerns being raised about maintaining institutional balance and mutual respect between the Bench and the Bar.
[DS]
Suggested Reading:
Subscribe to our channels on YouTube and WhatsApp
Download our app on Play Store