In a significant development, the High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association and the Shillong Bar Association have unanimously adopted a resolution condemning Meghalaya Advocate General Amit Kumar over his alleged generalized remarks concerning the Bar’s failure to protect its women members and provide them with a safe environment.

The resolution was passed at a Joint Extraordinary General Body Meeting held on August 5, 2026, which was attended by 406 members. According to the copy of the resolution, the members adopted all the resolutions by raising their hands.

The Bar Associations alleged that the Advocate General’s statement cast “serious aspersion” on the Bar and amounted to making false statements before the court.

Resolution to Remove Amit Kumar From Association Rolls

The meeting resolved that the name of Amit Kumar, Advocate General, be removed from the rolls of advocates of both the High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association and the Shillong Bar Association.

The Associations further resolved that he would no longer be treated as a member of either Association and that their members would henceforth not recognize Amit Kumar as the Advocate General for the State of Meghalaya.

Demand for Removal as Advocate General

The Bar Associations also resolved to send a formal communication to the Chief Minister of Meghalaya, informing him of the resolution and demanding the formal removal of Amit Kumar from the office of Advocate General.

The resolution calls for such removal within one week from receipt of the resolution.

Resolution Sent to Constitutional and Judicial Authorities

Copies of the resolution are also proposed to be forwarded to the President of India, Prime Minister’s Office, Governor of Meghalaya, Chief Minister of Meghalaya, Chief Justice and Judges of the High Court of Meghalaya, Chairman of the Bar Council of India and Chairman of the Bar Council of Delhi.

The development follows the Bar Associations’ strong objection to the remarks attributed to the Advocate General concerning the safety and protection of women members of the Bar.

The resolution reflects the collective position adopted by the two Meghalaya Bar Associations at the August 5 meeting. However, the Association's resolution demanding removal does not itself remove the Advocate General from constitutional office; the formal appointment and removal of an Advocate General are governed by the constitutional framework applicable to the office.