Introduction

Bar is a collective term for the attorneys who are licensed to practice in the Courts, or a
particular court, of any state.
The term ‘Bar' was originated in England with the partition of Bar fixed for dividing the court
hall into two parts for the purpose of separating lawyers and officers of the court from suitors
and another general public. Black's Law dictionary defines 'Bar' as the railing that separates
the front area where the judge, court personnel, lawyers and witness conduct court business,
from the back area which provides seats for observers. The same dictionary has also defined
the ‘Bar’ as the whole body of lawyers qualified to practice in a given court or jurisdiction;
the legal profession or an organized sub-set of it.
“Encyclopedia of American explains that the term ‘Bar’ as a court room applied to the area
impliedly reserved for the principals of the court. i.e., the judge, the attorneys, the court
officer and members of the jury.
At present Bar means a particular part of court room where lawyers sit.

Bench means all the judges taken together as distinguished from the ‘Bar’ the name for all the
members of the legal profession- bench is that part of the court considered in its official
capacity, while the judges are sitting. The earlier meaning of Bar contained the part of Bench
also at the present term ‘Bar’ is applied for the attorney’s part of the court and the term is
used for the judicial officer’s part of the Court.

2) Role of Bar Bench in Administration of Justice 

         The Bar and Bench play important role in the administration of justice. According to
Justice C.L. Anand, there is no office in the State of such power as that of the Judge. Judges
hold power which is immensely greater than that of any other functionary. The common
people's life, and liberty, personal domestic happiness, property, and reputation subject to the
wisdom of the judges and hang citizens on their decisions. If Judicial power becomes corrupt
no security is left of life, liberty expires, there no guarantee is left of personal or domestic
happiness. A strong powerful, impartial active and the capable judiciary is the greatest need
of a State. On the account of the importance of the judges in the maintenance of the orderly
society, judges should perform their duties.

Judge is a public officer who hears and decides cases, settling the dispute in the court of law.
There is no office in the State of such power as that of the Judge. Judges hold power which is
immensely greater than that of any other functionary.

Duties of Bench/Judges

In the state, there is no office of such powers as that of the judge, as the powers which are
held by judges are greater than any other functionary. The citizen’s life, liberty, personal
domestic happiness, reputation, and property all are subject to the wisdom of the judges and
all the citizens have to comply with the judge’s decision. If judges become corrupt there will
be no security left with citizens to life and liberty, and also there will be no guarantee of
personal domestic happiness to them. Thus, the state needs a judiciary that is strong,
powerful, and impartial. The judges shall perform the following duties:

Patient Hearing

While hearing cases the judge shall not be biased, and shall not form the opinion regarding
the merit of the case until he heard both the parties, he should act in the interest of justice.
Sufficient opportunity shall be given to the advocates by judges in order to present their case.

Impartiality 

Judges shall act impartial, and shall not do anything in favor of his friend and relatives, he
must do everything for justice.

Avoidance of Interruptions 

When advocates examine witnesses in a case or argue in case, the judge shall make sure that
there are no interruptions. Unwanted interruption or bad comments by the judges during the
hearing of the case disturbs the advocates and as a result, he may not be able to present his
case properly. But the judges can interfere in the following circumstances:

  To prevent waste of time.

  To check the relevancy of arguments put forward by the advocates.
  To get clarifications on a point that is not clear to him.
 To express his opinion on a point.
 To promote speedy disposal of cases.

Interpretation of Statutes

In some cases, interpretations of acts, codes, regulations, orders, etc has to be done by the
court, during the process of administration of justice, in order to remove the ambiguity or
inconsistency or to know the actual meaning of the provisions. So in such cases, proper
interpretation of statutes should be done by the court to render justice to the parties.

Avoidance of unreasonable adjournments

Without reasonable and sufficient grounds cases shall not be adjourned. One of the reasons
for mounting arrears of cases is unreasonable adjournment which causes hardship to the
parties.

Speedy disposal
Cases that come before the court shall be disposed of as soon as possible, as when justice is
delayed it means justice is denied.

Avoiding harsh comments

Harsh comments shall be avoided by the judge in the court about the advocate’s lack of
knowledge in law, similarly, without any sufficient reason, they can not ask the advocates to
leave the court. Judges should possess a calm temper.

Independence

The protection of the independence of the judiciary should be the prime duty of the judge.

Meeting of judges and advocates

At regular intervals, meetings shall be conducted between the judges and the Advocates, such
that they can put forward their difficulties in front of each other and it can be sorted out, this
will help in strengthening the Bar and Bench relation. 

Integrity

The character and the conduct of a judge shall be praiseworthy, and he should have personal
and intellectual integrity.

Industriousness

A judge should regularly update his knowledge and should know all the recent developments
and changes made in the law.

Like Judges, Advocates also plays important role in the administration of Justice. Advocates
are officers of the Court; they are expected to assist the Court in the Administration of
Justice. Advocates collect materials relating to the case and thereby assist the Court in
arriving at a (conclusion)correct judgment. An advocate is a partner with the judiciary in the
administration of Justice. 

Duties of an Advocate in the Court while dealing with his case

1) As the advocate is are officers of the court, they are required to maintain towards the court
respectful attitude bringing in mind that the dignity of the judicial office is essential for the
survival of the society.
 2) an advocate should make his best effort to restrain and prevent his Clint from resorting to
unfair practices in relation to the court

 3) an advocate should not influence the decision of the court by any illegal or improper
means

4) an advocate should not communicate with a judge relating to pending case

5) an advocate is required to conduct himself with dignity and self-respect during the
presentation of the case
6) an advocate should not consider himself mere mouthpiece of the client and should exercise
his own judgment in the use of restrained language in dealing with the court

7) an advocate should not use intemperate language during arguments in the court .he should
avoid scurrilous attacks in pleadings

8) an advocate should make accurate statement of facts and should not twice them

9) an advocate should not misguide the court by citing knowingly an overruled decision or a
repealed statue

10) an advocate should uphold the dignity and should not do anything which brings the court
into disrepute

3) Bar-Bench Relations:

      Administration of Justice is not something which concerns Bench only. It concerns the
Bar also. Mutual respect is necessary for the maintenance of the cordial relations between the
Bar and Bench. Advocates and Judges are complementary to each other. Bar is the Principal
ground for recruiting Judges. So, they both belong to the same community. Bar and Bench
should maintain cordial relations with each other. But on account of nature of duties to be
discharged by advocates and judges, they may get into dialogues sometimes, humorous,
sometimes heated and sometimes harsh.

Scandalising of the court by an advocate is really polluting the very foundation of justice and
such conduct by an advocate brings disrepute to the whole administration of justice. 

The attitude of an Advocate towards the Court should be one of the uniform respects,
whatever the status of the Court. Advocates Private opinion about the Presiding officer, he
must not show in its behaviour because he has to uphold the dignity of the judiciary as an
institution. At the same, it is equally the duty of the judiciary not only to be polite towards the
members of the Bar but to do everything possible to advance its high traditions.  
  
The uncourteous conduct or misconduct of a lawyer or judge may amount to contempt of
Court, there are two Types of Contempt of Court. for example, using insulting language
against a judge or threatening him with transfer or impeachment or addressing the judge in a
loose manner or questioning his authority to ask questions or making scandalous allegations
against a judge etc. It amounts to contempt of Court. He is liable for his uncourteous act and
punishable for such contempt of Court. The punishment for contempt of Court is intended to
protect the public confidence in the system of Administration of Justice.   

Types of contempt of courts -

Section 2(A) of The Contempt of courts Act,1971, provides that contempt of court means
civil contempt or criminal contempt.
contempt of court classified mainly in two categories
1) Civil contempt of courts, and 
2) Criminal contempt of Court
           
The wilful disobedience to the order of court is considered civil contempt, while the
scandalizing or lowering the authority of the court in the public eye is considered criminal
contempt.  The classification or categorization of contempt of court into Civil and criminal
are not closed. There are several contempt which do not fall in any of them. for example,
undue delay in pronouncing the order by a judge or judge coming late to the court by amount
to contempt of court, but they are not covered exactly by the definition of classification of
contempt in the act.

1) Civil contempt-
             According to section 2 (b) of The Contempt of court Act, 1971, civil contempt means
"willful disobedience to any judgement, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of
a court or willful breach of an undertaking given to the Court. "
           
Thus, Civil contempt consist of disobeying the orders and process of the court. Civil
contempt involves only the wilful disobedience of the court’s order or breach of undertaking
given to the court.  The purpose of the proceeding for the Civil contempt is not only to punish
the container but also to exercise enforcement and obedience to the order of the court.
civil contempt serves two purposes -

1) Vindication of the public interest by punishment of contemptuous conduct; and

2) coercion to compel the container to do what the court requires of him.

To constitutes 'civil contempt' the following things are required to be proved:

A) there is disobedience of the order, decree etc. of the court or breach of undertaking given
to the court; and 

B) the disobedience of Breach Is Wilful.

For civil contempt it is necessary that order which has been disobeyed must have been passed
by the court having jurisdiction to pass such order. If the order has been passed without
jurisdiction, it is not binding on the party against which it has been Passed by the and
therefore disobedience of such order will not amount to contempt of Court. The burden to
prove that the court has no jurisdiction to pass the order lies on the person who alleges it.

When the court orders a person to do something or not to do something, it is incumbent on

that party to comply with that order forthwith. The person disobeying the order of the court
will alone be responsible for the consequence and he cannot be heard to say that he referred
the matter to his higher officer.

The breach of undertaking given to the court is also taken as contempt, if it is wilful. the basis
for taking the breach of undertaking as contempt of court is that the container by making a
false representation to the court obtains a benefit for himself and if he fails to Honour the
undertaking, he plays a serious fraud on the Court itself and thereby obstructs the course of
justice and brings disrepute to the judicial institution. But the breach of undertaking recorded
are forming part of compromise decree, would not amount to contempt of court.

For civil contempt, the disobedience of the order, decree, etc. of the court or breach of
undertaking given to The Court Must Be willful . Willful means the action or state for which
compulsion of ignorance or accident cannot be pleaded as excuse, intentional, deliberate, due
to perversity or self-will. To establish that the disobedience is willful , it is not necessary to
show that it is contumacious  in the sense that there is a direct intention to disobey the order;
it is
sufficient to show that effective administration of justice requires some penalty for
disobedience to the order of the court, if it is a more than casual, accidental or unintentional.

The reasons of the Civil contempt is wilful disobedience to any judgement degree, direction,
order, or writ of a court, and not Mere inaction to give effect to it. The conduct of the alleged
contemner must be wilful showing deliberate and conscious disregard of the court order. or a
despising or disdainful attitude towards the verdict of the court.

If a party who has full knowledge of the order of the court or is conscious and aware of the
consequences and implications of the court's order, ignores it or acts in violation of the
court’s order, it must be held that disobedience is willful.

Whether the disobedience has been wilful or not It is an issue to be decided by the court,
taking into account the facts the circumstances of the case.

2) Criminal contempt -
According to Section 2(c) of The Contempt of courts Act, 1971, "criminal contempt"
means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible
representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other Act whatsoever
which -

I) scandalize or tends to scandalize, or lower or tends to lower, the authority of any Court; or

II) prejudice or interfere or tents to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding;
or
III) interface or tends to interfere with or obstructs, tends to obstruct, the administration of
justice in any other manner.

Criminal contempt is a conduct directed against dignity of Court.

Criminal contempt is directed against the power and dignity of the court. The definition of
criminal contempt is wide enough to include any act of a person which would tend to
interfere with the administration of justice or with which would lower to the authority of the
court.

To constitute the criminal contempt, it is not necessary that the publication or other acts
should have actually resulted in scandalizing or lowering the authority of the court but it is
enough that the act is likely to result in scandalizing. Thus the offense of contempt is
complete by mere attempt and does not depend on actual deflection of Justice .

'Scandalize' connotes to speak falsely, or maliciously, to bring into approach, dishonour,

disgrace, to offend the feelings, conscious or property of an action. ' scandalize' also means to
offend a moral feeling, and to make a public scandal of, to utter false or malicious reports of a
person's conduct, slander, or to bring same or discredit or to disgrace. We can say that the
disgraceful word scandalize means the defamatory, derogatory, false malicious disgraceful
statements regarding the persons as Judges.

It is for the court to decide whether or not the publication or act is likely to scandalize or
lower the authority of the court or interfere with due course of any judicial proceeding for
administration of justice.
The publication act will be taken as criminal contempt, if it has resulted in scandalizing the
authority of court or interference with the due course of judicial proceedings or interfering the
administration of justice in any matter.

 The word ' Publication ' was given very wide meaning. The publication may be by words
written or spoken by sign's or by visible representations or otherwise of any matter. but in the
Act, it is not clear as to whether the publication should be taken to mean Publication to the
general public or any kind of Publication.
Scandalizing the court means any hostile criticism of the judge; any Personal attack on him
unconnected with the office he holds, is dealt with under the ordinary rules of Slender and
libel. The criticism can form the basis for committal of contempt of court only if it is made
against the judge in exercise of his judicial function.
The publication which prejudices or interferes with or tends to interfere with, the due course
of any judicial proceeding is taken as contempt of court. Whenever the publication or any
other act unduly influences the result of a litigation it is treated as criminal contempt of court
and a punished therefore.

If the parties to a pending proceeding are abused and vilified and the words are likely to
cause prejudice to the case, it will amount to contempt of court.

The publication of doing of any other act which interferes or tend to interfere with or
obstructs or tend to obstruct the administration of justice in any of other manner is also taken
as contempt of court.
An Advocate is an officer of the court and hence undue interference with the Advocate in the
discharge of his professional functions amount to contempt of court.
Any conduct by which course or Justice is prevented either by a party or a stranger is a
contempt of court. Any person who interferes or prevent other person from coming to the
stream of justice is he liable for contempt of Court.  The Court must be very careful in
analysing the facts and circumstances of the case for determining whether or not the action
taken by a person amounts to interfere with the course of Justice.
Witnesses are also integral part of the judicial process and they must have freedom to
perform their duties and so interference with performance of their duties is taken as contempt
of Court
Abuse of the process of court calculated to hamper the due course hamper of judicial
proceedings or the administration of Justice amounts to contempt of court.
Any misconduct done by any advocate or judge may amount to contempt of court, for
example, if any advocate uses any offending language against a judge or if he threatens the
judge to transfer the case or make scandalous allegations against a judge, etc. he commits
contempt of court and for such an act he liable to punishment also. In order to protect the
confidence of the public in the process of Administration of justice punishment for contempt
of court is provided.

The Supreme Court in P.D. Gupta v. Ram Murti and Others case has laid down his opinion
on Bar and Bench relation in the following words:

“An advocate should be fair not only towards his client but also towards the court as well as
towards the opposite party of the case. The process of administration of justice has to be kept
clean and uncorrupted. The Administration of justice not only concerns the Bench, it
concerns both the Bench and the Bar. The principal ground for recruiting judges is the Bar,
both the judges and the advocates complement each other. The main duty of an Advocate is
to present the case in court by informing the court about the law and the facts of the case and
to help the court in arising at the conclusion of the case. For good administration of justice,
an advocate shall possess good advocacy skills, so that he can put forward the case in court
properly and not get interrupted by the judge unless the interruption is necessary.”

In the case of Mahant Hakumat Rai v. Emperor the high court held that :

“An advocate can claim their right to be heard by the court before which they are practicing
while performing their duty they shall be fearless and independent, and also they have the
right to protest against any irregular procedure done by any judge. He would be perfectly
right in asking for getting a proper hearing and objecting to any interruption made by the
judge in order to disturb him while he is arguing the case in court and performing his duty
towards the client. However, the presence of professional etiquette coupled with the
recognition by the judiciary will help in reducing the conflicts between the Bar and Bench”.

Conclusion
An independent and fearless Bar is not preferred over an independent Bench, similarly, an
independent Bench is also not preferred over an independent and fearless Bar, neither of them
is superior over the other, both are essential for a free society. The freedom given to the Bar
requires an independent judiciary, through which if necessary the freedom that is given to the
Bar, be vindicated. A well-behaved, responsible, cultured, and a leaned Bar is one of the
potent means for assuring judges their independence. Finally, the keystone for the smooth
functioning of the courts in the general interest of the society is the reciprocal adjustment of
conduct by the Bar and the Bench.

REFRENCES
 https://www.srdlawnotes.com/2017/09/concept-and-role-of-bar-bench-relation.html
 https://blog.ipleaders.in/bar-and-bench-the-everlasting-relation/
 https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=bar%20bench%20relationship
 http://www.allahabadhighcourt.in/event/RoleoftheBenchandtheBarMHBeg.pdf