In a letter dated October 27, 2026, Senior Advocate Dr. C.P. Upadhyay, newly elected President of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad has communicated to Chief Justice, Allahabad High Court, it's concern regarding the respect and dignity of advocates. The was signed by Advocate Santosh Kumar Mishra, newly elected General Secretary of the High Court Bar Association, Allahabad.
The letter reads: "It is to inform you that today, dated 27.10.2026, in Court No. 49, where Hon’ble Justice Shri Ajay Bhanot is sitting, he has made a rule that in his court room, a separate chair shall be placed in the front row for a police officer or any other senior officer to sit. In this sequence, in Hon’ble Justice Shri Ajay Bhanot’s Court No. 49, a Superintendent of Police of some district was sitting in the row behind the Ld. Additional Government Advocate (AGA). An advocate respectfully said to him, “Please sit behind; this is not your seat.” On this, the Ld. AGA scolded the advocate and said that he would complain about him when Hon’ble Justice arrived. As soon as Hon’ble Justice entered the court room, the Ld. AGA complained to the Hon’ble Justice. Upon this, the Hon’ble Justice pointed a finger at that advocate and, in very stern words, passed an order to send the advocate to jail. When the advocate apologized, he was told to apologize to that Superintendent of Police. The advocate also apologized to the Superintendent of Police, but Hon’ble Justice Shri Ajay Bhanot compelled the advocate to apologize to the Superintendent of Police. At the same time, he also mocked senior advocate Shri V.P. Srivastava, who was sitting in his court room, thereby hurting the dignity of respected advocates. The conduct of the Hon’ble Justice falls within the category of contempt."
The letter concluded:"Therefore, it is humbly requested that you kindly take serious cognizance of the above matter and take appropriate action; otherwise, the High Court Bar Association will boycott the court of Hon’ble Justice Shri Ajay Bhanot, and this new practice of seating a particular person in a special manner. It is clear from this that if the court is free to insult an advocate, then the advocate will also not hesitate to insult the court."
The letter is copied to Registrar General, Supreme Court, New Delhi and Justice Ajay Bhanot of Allahabad High Court.
Justice Bhanot is alleged to have humiliated an advocate during court proceedings and also mocked a Senior Advocate V.P. Srivastava.
A circular dated October 27 for abstention was issued in the evening hours by advocate Neeraj, Chairman, Coordination Committee of the elhi Bar Association after a meeting of the Committee. It has resolved to go for indefinite abstention from judicial work. It reiterated its demand of immediate suspension of the ACP and SHO of Shahdara Police Station. Coordination Committee of the Delhi Bar is protesting against the registration of an FIR at Shahdara Police Station against advocates and threats to advocates in the police station by an ACP. The Committee said that judicial work shall be abstained from until the Suspension of the ACP and SHO of Shahdara Police Station. New Delhi Bar Association (NDBA), Saket Bar Association, Central Delhi District Bar Association and others have expressed their support to the call of the coordination committee. NDBA has declared a protest march towards Delhi Police Headquarters from Patiala House court on October 29. NDBA Secretary Tarun Rana also issued a circular.
The grievance originated from an FIR concerning an incident in which Advocate Lalit Bansal sustained serious head injury following an assault. Advocate Amulya Ratan is the complainant in the matter. The photograph depicted the head injury sustained by Advocate Lalit Bansal. It also said that on the evening of October 23, 2026, several advocates visited Police Station Shahdara in connection with the incident and to seek appropriate legal action against the persons concerned. October 24, the advocates came to know that the persons concerned had not been arrested and had reportedly been released.
The circular stated that when advocates approached the police station to express their concern regarding the handling of the matter and to seek accountability in accordance with law, an incident involving ACP Manasvi Vashishta occurred. It is alleged that the ACP threatened and intimidated the advocates. The Coordination Committee has demanded the immediate suspension of ACP Manasvi Vashishta and the concerned SHO, pending an impartial Inquiry.
Earlier, in May 2026, Patna Court's Co-ordination Committee of three Advocate Associations had also raised the issue of rift between Bar and Bench, pointed out uncharitable, uncouth, abusive, insulting behaviour of judges towards advocates.
To go on strike/boycott courts is a fundamental right of Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and it is a mode of peaceful representation to express the grievances by the lawyers’ community is concerned. In Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal vs. Union of India & Anr. (2002), the 5-Judge Constitution Bench of Supreme Court has recognized "protest abstention from work" if the issue involves "dignity or integrity or independence of the Bar and/or the Bench.
In June 2025, Telangana High Court Advocates' Association had boycotted the court of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya, citing insults, humiliation, and heavy costs.
Senior advocates have pointed out that the level of gratuitous rudeness in the courts has increased to a point that it has become insufferable.
In an article entitled Judicial Misbehaviour, senior advocate P V Dinesh recalled how a single judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court who lost his temper and ordered the imprisonment of a young lawyer with only two years of practice. The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Bar Council of India (BCI) invited the attention of the Chief Justice of India through representations and resolutions. The Supreme Court suo motu seized the issue, and after registering two writ petitions, gracefully closed the matter on the judicial side by observing:
"Members of the judiciary at all levels must exhibit patience, compassion and a spirit of encouragement towards all, especially young members of the Bar. While it is certainly a solemn duty of senior members of the Bar to inculcate discipline, professional ethics and continuous learning, the responsibility does not lie with the Bar alone, but with the Bench as well, to nurture a sense of duty and integrity, so that every lawyer sees themselves as an officer of the court first"
He also referred to the observation of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court which urged the judges to refrain from making harsh or disparaging remarks against counsels, parties or witnesses, unless it is absolutely necessary for deciding the case and until they are heard.
Dinesh cited Tushar Mehta's book titled The Bench, the Bar and the Bizarre, wherein, he has devoted an entire chapter to "Bullies on the Bench" but the Solicitor General of India not dare to name the specific "bullies" in the Indian judiciary.
The fact is that only a small percentage of the judicial community falls in the category of bullying judges.
Notably, there has also been occasions wherein, bar associations have gone on a strike in defence of the independence of judiciary.
No comments:
Post a Comment