The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry has temporarily barred advocate R Balasubramanian from practicing before any court, tribunal, or authority across India, after he allegedly used obscene and abusive language against judges both inside and outside the courtroom.

The decision comes in the wake of a Madras High Court directive asking police to initiate criminal proceedings against the lawyer. The Court had earlier observed that Balasubramanian had obstructed the police from executing a non-bailable warrant issued against his clients and had repeatedly cursed and abused the judiciary.

“The Bar Council has perused the entire records and has passed a resolution… prohibiting said advocate from practicing as an Advocate before all Courts, Tribunals and other authorities in India either in his name or in any assumed name till the disposal of the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Bar Council,” the resolution stated.

The Bar Council has also initiated formal disciplinary proceedings against Balasubramanian, and his suspension will continue pending the outcome.

Justice PT Asha of the Madras High Court had earlier taken serious note of the advocate’s conduct, directing the Bar Council to take appropriate action. “Considering the fact that a member of this noble profession has acted in such a fashion which has brought discredit to the profession… necessary steps [must be taken] to initiate proceedings,” the Court said.

The incident stems from a contempt case involving three individuals represented by Balasubramanian. On June 4, the Court had ordered their arrest to secure their appearance, but police reported they were unable to carry out the order as the lawyer had interfered.

The High Court also highlighted another troubling episode in which Balasubramanian filed a petition on behalf of the same clients—purportedly in a property dispute—without properly informing them of its contents. During the hearing, the clients admitted they didn’t understand what had been filed and were unaware that it involved a request to transfer the case.

The affidavit, the Court noted, was entirely drafted by the advocate himself and included language that was not only inappropriate but disrespectful to members of the judiciary, including a labour court officer.

The Court expressed its deep concern over the advocate’s conduct, stating that it had brought disrepute to the legal profession.