Shillong, Sept 6: The women lawyers of bar associations met Governor CH Vijayashankar on Saturday (Sept 5) and demanded probe into panel of advocates and appointment of the relatives of Advocate General.
They also reiterated that they are safe and independent.
Full text below
M E M O R A N D U M
To,
His Excellency,
The Governor of Meghalaya,
Raj Bhavan, Shillong.
Subject: Representation by the Women Members of the High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association and the Shillong Bar Association seeking an independent and impartial inquiry into the appointment and engagement of Panel Advocates and other counsel for the State of Meghalaya, and into the circumstances surrounding such appointments.
May it please Your Excellency,
We, the undersigned women advocate practising before the Hon’ble High Court of Meghalaya and other Courts and Tribunals in the State, and being members of the High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association and the Shillong Bar Association, most respectfully submit this Memorandum for the kind consideration and appropriate intervention of Your Excellency.
We submit this representation in the larger interest of the dignity and independence of the legal profession, equality of opportunity amongst advocates, transparency in public appointments, proper utilisation of public funds and preservation of public confidence in the high constitutional office of the Advocate General of Meghalaya.
We respectfully state at the outset that this representation is being made by us as equal and independent members of the Bar. We do not seek any preferential treatment merely because we are women, nor do we seek professional opportunities by reason of gender, patronage or personal proximity to any office-holder.
- BACKGROUND
The present representation arises in the backdrop of serious concerns expressed by members of the legal fraternity regarding the functioning of the office of the Learned Advocate General, Shri Amit Kumar, particularly in relation to the manner in which the Bar has been referred to and treated in public and judicial proceedings, as well as concerns regarding the appointment and engagement of advocates to represent the State of Meghalaya.
On 3rd August 2026, during the proceedings in W.P.(C) No. 350 of 2026, Meghalaya High Court Bar Association and Another v. State of Meghalaya, the Learned Advocate General is stated to have made submissions before the Hon’ble Court alleging, inter alia, that the Bar Associations had failed to protect women members, had not provided a safe environment for women advocates and that complaints relating to sexual harassment had been received by him which, according to him, had not been adequately addressed by the Bar Associations.
The principal issue in the said writ proceedings, as understood by the Associations, concerned an incident involving an advocate who was alleged to have molested an intern in his private chamber at Keating Road and who was thereafter subjected to assault and public humiliation before being paraded towards Sadar Police Station by non-state actors.
The women members of the Bar respectfully submit that the making of generalised statements concerning the safety of women advocates and alleged complaints of sexual harassment, without particulars being furnished to the Associations, caused considerable concern and distress amongst women members of the Bar.
Thereafter, a request was made through counsel seeking particulars of the complaints allegedly referred to. It is understood that the Learned Advocate General declined to furnish such particulars.
In his open letter dated 4th August 2026, the Learned Advocate General is stated to have reiterated his position and, inter alia, stated:
“I stand by what I have said … this allegation has not happened for the first time … there is a strong sense of discomfort among the lady lawyers.”
- POSITION OF THE WOMEN ADVOCATES
We consider it necessary to place our position on record in clear and unequivocal terms.
The women advocate of Meghalaya are safe, independent, professionally capable and fully at par with male members of the Bar.
We do not accept any suggestion that women advocate as a class are incapable of protecting their own dignity, professional interests or rights.
Nor do we accept that women advocate require professional patronage or preferential treatment in order to establish themselves.
Women advocates have successfully established themselves in the Courts of Meghalaya by their own ability and professional standing. They appear and argue matters, conduct proceedings, advise clients, draft pleadings and discharge all responsibilities of legal practice on equal terms with their male colleagues.
We further state that no woman advocate should ever be required to compromise her dignity, professional ethics, independence or principles in order to obtain professional work, recognition or advancement.
Accordingly, our grievance is not against legitimate scrutiny of any complaint concerning the safety or welfare of women.
Our grievance is against any unparticularised, unverified or generalised public assertion which may have the effect of casting aspersions upon the Bar Associations or upon women advocates themselves without the facts being independently established.
If any genuine complaint exists, it should be dealt with by the competent authority in accordance with law and due process.
We stand fully committed to assisting any competent authority in ensuring that genuine complaints of misconduct or harassment are appropriately investigated.
III. CONCERNS REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF STATE PANEL ADVOCATES
We are further constrained to bring to Your Excellency’s notice a matter of serious public and professional concern regarding the appointment and engagement of Panel Advocates and other counsel representing the State of Meghalaya before various Courts, Tribunals and judicial or quasi-judicial forums.
A further concern relates to the alleged appointment or engagement of advocates who are professionally associated with, or have close professional proximity to, the chamber or office of the Learned Advocate General.
It has come to our knowledge and is a matter of apprehension amongst members of the legal fraternity that a substantial number of advocates associated with, or having professional proximity to, the chamber or office of the Learned Advocate General have received appointments or engagements to represent the State.
We respectfully submit that this raises legitimate questions concerning:
- The criteria adopted for appointment;
- The transparency of the selection process;
- Equal opportunity amongst eligible advocates;
- The objective basis upon which advocates are selected;
- The role, if any, of the Advocate General in such appointments;
- Possible conflicts of interest; and
- The proper use of public funds.
We emphasise that we do not question the professional competence or personal integrity of any advocate merely because he or she has received a State appointment.
Where public appointments are made and remuneration is paid from public funds, the process ought, as far as permissible in law, to be transparent, fair, objectively defensible and capable of withstanding public scrutiny.
- CONCERNS REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS
We have learnt that the wife of the Learned Advocate General was appointed as a Panel Advocate for the State immediately after he was appointed as Advocate General in the year 2018, and that, more recently, his son has also been appointed as a Panel Advocate for the State.
The Advocate General has admitted to having made these appointments and is intending to justify it. In our view, the appointment is completely illegal as Shri. Amit Kumar used the influence of his office to secure these appointments for his immediate family members, by promoting nepotism.
By such conduct, he has abused his power and is no longer fit to serve as the Advocate General of the State of Meghalaya
The cumulative circumstances have generated considerable concern amongst members of the legal fraternity. We respectfully submit that the questions raised herein are not merely personal questions concerning individual advocates.
In the circumstances stated above, we most respectfully pray that Your Excellency may be pleased to:
- Take cognizance of the concerns raised by the women advocates of the High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association and the Shillong Bar Association that Shri. Amit Kumar has abused his power as the Advocate General of the State of Meghalaya;
- Immediate removal of Shri. Amit Kumar as the Advocate General of the State of Meghalaya;
- Take such appropriate steps as may be necessary to ensure a transparent, merit-based and equal-opportunity system for appointment of State Panel Advocates;
- Pass such further or other orders as Your Excellency may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice, institutional integrity, the legal profession and public interest.
We respectfully reiterate that this representation is not an attempt to seek preferential treatment for women advocates, nor is it intended to question the professional competence of any individual advocate merely because of an appointment received by him or her.
Our concern is with the process, transparency and institutional propriety surrounding public appointments.
We further respectfully reiterate that legitimate complaints concerning the safety, dignity or welfare of women advocates must always be taken seriously and dealt with by the competent authority in accordance with law. At the same time, allegations concerning the Bar or its members should be capable of being substantiated through proper particulars and due process rather than being left as generalised assertions.
We accordingly place our faith in Your Excellency’s constitutional office and respectfully request that the matters raised herein be considered independently, objectively and impartially.
Submitted respectfully,
By the Women Advocates of
The High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association Shillong and The Shillong Bar Association Shillong
