Soldiers Are at War and You Want to Rest?" – Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Lawyers’ 'No Work Day' Protest.

Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Lawyers’ 'No Work Day' Protest

Introduction
In a powerful and thought-provoking observation, the Punjab & Haryana High Court recently called out lawyers for observing a "no work day," equating their responsibilities to those of soldiers who continue to serve even in the face of war. This comment has sparked widespread discussion about the duties of legal professionals and the limits of protest within the justice system.

What Happened?
On [insert date], the Punjab & Haryana High Court was hearing a matter where lawyers had abstained from work to observe what they called a “no work day.” In response, the court sternly remarked:

“Soldiers are at war and you want to rest?”

The bench emphasized that lawyers play a crucial role in upholding justice and cannot afford to halt the judicial machinery at will. The court highlighted that just like soldiers can't abandon their posts in difficult times, lawyers too should remain committed to their duties, especially when justice is at stake.

The Court's Viewpoint
The court reminded the Bar that while the right to protest exists, it cannot override the right of litigants to timely justice. “The courts are temples of justice,” the judges observed, adding that delays caused by boycotts and strikes are unfair to the common man who seeks redressal.

The court also referenced several Supreme Court judgments that have consistently declared strikes by lawyers as illegal and unethical.

Why This Matters
This statement is more than a rebuke; it's a wake-up call. In a country where courts are burdened with pendency and justice is often delayed, every day of strike only adds to the suffering of ordinary people. The legal fraternity holds a responsibility—not just to clients, but to the justice system itself.

Balancing Protest and Profession
Lawyers, like any citizen, have the right to express dissent. But when that expression interferes with their fundamental professional duty—to represent their clients and assist the court—it becomes a constitutional and ethical concern.

The court’s sharp comment serves as a reminder that while advocacy for rights is vital, abandoning duty in protest can do more harm than good.

Conclusion
The Punjab & Haryana High Court’s analogy of comparing lawyers to soldiers isn't just rhetoric—it’s a powerful reminder of the sanctity of duty. As the custodians of justice, lawyers must strike a balance between protest and professionalism. After all, in a democracy, the courtroom is not just a place for legal battles, but a battlefield for justice.