Abstract: The legal profession occupies a vital role in ensuring the administration of justice, upholding the rule of law, and safeguarding constitutional rights. However, recurrent strikes and abstention from court proceedings by lawyers in India have raised critical concerns regarding professional ethics and the effective functioning of the justice delivery system. This research paper examines the socio-legal dimensions of lawyers’ strikes, analyzing their impact on litigants, judicial efficiency, and public trust in the legal system. The study investigates the ethical obligations imposed on advocates under the Advocates Act, 1961, the Bar Council of India Rules, and constitutional mandates, emphasizing principles such as duty to the court, duty to clients, and commitment to legal justice. Through review of landmark judicial pronouncements including Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003), this paper highlights that lawyers’ strikes are considered illegal and unjustified, except under the most exceptional circumstances. The research also explores the underlying causes of professional protests—ranging from political influence to institutional dissatisfaction—and assesses alternative mechanisms for expressing collective grievances without hampering court proceedings. The findings underscore the need for stronger regulatory enforcement, ethical sensitization, accountability mechanisms, and constructive dialogue between Bar Associations and judicial authorities. Ultimately, the paper advocates for ethical legal practice that balances advocacy rights with the paramount obligation to ensure uninterrupted access to justice.

Keywords: Lawyers’ strike, Professional ethics, Bar Council of India, Access to justice, Legal profession in India, Judicial decisions.