Nagaland Bar Association renews push for separate HC, in-state AG

Nagaland Bar Association (NBA) has urged the state government to take immediate steps for establishment of a separate High Court for Nagaland, completion of the new High Court building and appointment of an Advocate General from within the state.
In a representation addressed to chief minister Neiphiu Rio, NBA president A. Zhimomi and secretary S. Keyho stated that more than six decades after statehood on December 1, 1963, Nagaland was lagging behind and yet to have its own High Court and had also not appointed an Advocate General from among legal practitioners of the state.
NBA said it had submitted several representations to the government on the issues, which were reiterated during its annual general meeting held on March 27, 2026.
The association said it resolved to reaffirm its stand and accordingly submitted the present representation in line with the resolutions adopted.
In this regard, the association urged the state government to take active steps to pursue establishment of a separate High Court for Nagaland, asserting that the matter should not be linked to ongoing political discussions.
It maintained that a separate High Court was essential and should be set up without further delay, pointing out that several North Eastern states formed after Nagaland had already been granted their own High Courts.
NBA also expressed concern that construction of the new High Court premises at Meriema remained incomplete.
The association stated that development of judicial infrastructure was the responsibility of the state and that adequate facilities must be ensured for all three organs– legislature, judiciary and executive– adding that the present situation reflected a dismal picture of the collective psyche.
NBA said the Kohima Bench of the Gauhati High Court was its oldest bench and had already celebrated its golden jubilee. The association stated that the Bar in Nagaland had been in existence since the inception of statehood, with its formal establishment in 1969, and asserted that it had produced eminent members in the legal fraternity. It maintained that there was no valid reason for not appointing the Advocate General from among legal practitioners of the state.
NBA urged the government to act in public interest on the issues raised and called for prompt action.
It also called on the state to pursue establishment of a separate High Court by engaging with the Centre to remove obstacles hindering the same.
NBA urged the government to provide adequate funds for completion of the new Court premises without further delay and to appoint the Advocate General from among members of the state’s legal fraternity.
The association expressed hope that the sentiments conveyed in the representation would be appreciated in the proper perspective and called for prompt and appropriate action.