Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Thursday, November 21, 2024

Why UP Has Least Benches In India And West UP Has None?

Posted in: Judiciary
Thu, Jul 15, 21, 17:03, 3 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5286
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan

Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan, has maximum districts - 75, has maximum constituencies - 80, has maximum poverty, has maximum pending cases, has maximum MPs and MLAs in Parliament and State Assemblies, has maximum undertrials, has given maximum PM to India including Narendra Modi, has maximum cases of riots, loot and arson and what not but still has least number of benches? Why here also it is West UP which accounts for more than half of the pending cases of UP and yet not a single bench has been created here due to which people of more than 20 districts are compelled to travel more than 800 km on an average all the way to Allahabad?

Why UP has only one high court bench at Lucknow and that too just 150-200 km from Allahabad and that too way back in 1948 on July 1 but nothing for West UP even in 2021? Why Centre takes no time in acting on Justice Jaswant Committee report recommendation to create a high court bench at Aurangabad in Maharashtra in 1985 but does not approve even a single bench for UP even though Justice Jaswant Singh recommended three benches for UP at Agra, Nainital and Dehradun till 2021?

Why Centre takes no time in creating high court itself at Sikkim where the number of pending cases are just 69 - 54 civil and 15 criminal but fails to approve even a single bench for West UP? Why Centre takes no time in creating two high court benches for Karnataka at Gulbarga and Dharwad even though the number of pending cases are just 1,55,690 and it already had a bench at Hubli whereas in UP the number of pending cases are more than 10 lakh at least yet it has least benches in India?

Why Government takes no time in creating high courts for very small States like Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura where are the number of pending cases are just in few hundred or thousand but for UP not a single more bench has been added since independence? Why West UP which accounts for more than 57 % of the total pending cases of UP as admitted by Justice Jaswant Commission itself has not even a single bench of high court? Why Centre cares least for the people of West UP in 26 districts who have to travel 700 -750 km on an average to attend the court hearings at Allahabad and time and again bear innumerable inconveniences?

Why Centre takes the stand that India cannot afford a single more bench at any corner of UP for 80 districts but can afford two benches more for Karnataka for just 4 and 8 districts at Dharwad and Gulbarga respectively? Why the high court and benches of 8 states are nearer to West UP as compared to Allahabad yet Centre decides that the people of West UP must suffer and travel all the way to Allahabad?

Why when Dr Sampoornanand in 1955 for the first time recommended a high court bench for West UP at Meerut did Centre not act? Why when so many other UP CM like Banarsi Das, ND Tiwari, Rajnath Singh etc strongly recommend the creation of a bench in West UP still no bench has been created here? Why Centre even disregarded Justice Jaswant Singh Commission's recommendations of setting up three high court benches here? Why lawless state like UP has least High Court Benches in India and another lawless state like Bihar has none?

Why the lawyers of West UP have been going on strike every Saturday since 1981which means more than 40 years in 2021 to draw Centre's attention of how more than 9 crore people of West UP are suffering interminably and are compelled to travel whole night to Allahabad to attend court hearings but Centre refuses to budge?

Why lawyers of West UP even went on strike for several months continuously several times but Centre refused? Why Centre took no time in setting up high court benches in other States like Aurangabad in Maharashtra, Jalpaiguri in West Bengal and at Tamil Nadu in Madurai in Tamil Nadu as recommended by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission but not for UP? Why statehood is given promptly to states which are much smaller than West UP, hardly have 1 or 2 crore population unlike West UP which has more than 9 crore population?

Why Centre ignores that lawyers of West UP have gone on strike in 2014-2015 for 80 days and in the past for 6 months at a row for a bench and so this sensitive issue cannot any longer be brushed aside a carpet? Why Centre ignores that lawyers of West UP have started going on strike for 2 days in a week – Wednesday and Saturday in support of the age old demand for a bench?

Why Centre refuses to implement the report made by Law Commission in its 230th report (2009) of creating more high court benches except two benches at Karnataka and vows to implement the fourth report made more than 50 years ago in 1956 by First Law Commission of not creating more benches especially in big states like UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, Orissa etc? Why all major political parties have on one occasion or other supported a bench in West UP but still there is none? Why West UP has an area of 98,933 square km which accounts for 33.61 percent of total area of UP and yet no bench but Lucknow in Central region has just 62,363 square km and yet it has a bench?

Why Centre keeps on blaming State for not recommending even when it was in 1955 that a bench for West UP was first recommended and as Soli J Sorabjee, the former Attorney General rightly said that:
The Centre without any recommendation from the State Chief Minister or Chief Justice of a State is fully empowered under our Constitution to set up a high court bench anywhere it wants at its own volition. Why Centre ignores blithely what the Chairman of Supreme Court Bar Association Krishna Mani had said quite explicitly that:
Only by the creation of a bench of high court in West UP will the people be able to secure speedy and cheap justice at their doorsteps!

Why when even UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon termed UP as Crime and Rape Capital of India yet Centre is not prepared to create more benches here? Why Centre knowing that West UP has maximum crime, maximum riots as happened recently in Saharanpur, Muzaffarnagar etc which brought us international shame yet it approves no bench for it? Disgusting!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut-250001, UP.

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Rahendra Baglari v. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M) writ petitioner for adjoining a Judicial Magistrate and the High Court and its Registry as Respondents to his plea against the order passed by the said Magistrate.
Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal vs.Uttarakhand long standing or established status quo brought about by judgments interpreting local or state laws, should not be lightly departed from.
Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur apart from High Court at Mumbai but on the contrary UP which has maximum pending cases in India
It is most shocking to see that a peaceful, one of the most developed and most prosperous state like Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur
I am neither a member nor supporter of BJP or any other political party nor a member of any of BJP's affiliated organizations like the RSS or VHP or any other organization.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited advocates cannot throw away legal rights or enter into arrangements contrary to law. It was also made clear that any concession in law made in this regard by either counsel would not bind the parties.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on December 28, 2020 had expressed shock and deep concern on the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police against lawyers, including the search conducted at the premises of an advocate representing some of the accused in the North-East Delhi riots cases.
media trial during criminal investigation interferes with administration of justice and hence amounts to contempt of court as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Jamal v. Maharashtra dismissed a plea filed by the National President of BJP Minority Morcha – Jamal Anwar Siddiqui seeking 'X' category security.
Duroply Industries Limited and anr. Vs Ma Mansa Enterprises Private Limited in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction has recalled its own order of an injunction passed in a trademark dispute as the Judge presiding over the case had appeared for one party in respect of the same trademark in the past.
At the outset, it must be stated rather disconcertingly that it is India's misfortune that UP which has the maximum population more than 23 crore as Yogi Adityanath
At the outset, it has to be stated without mincing any words that it merits no reiteration that Judges age for retirement must be now increased to 75
Rajeev Bhardwaj v. H.P while dismissing a plea seeking a declaration of a sitting Judge's dissenting view as Coram non-judice and non est in the eyes of law.
Adv KG Suresh vs UOI has declared as unconstitutional the bar on lawyers representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals constituted under the Maintenance Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Maintenance Act).
Bar Council of India ensured that there is an entrance exam now for all those lawyers who want to practice which has to be cleared before lawyers can start practicing.
It is a matter of grave concern that while our Constitution enshrines the right to equality as postulated in Article 14 but in practice what we witness is just the reverse.
seeking interim bail/parole for the under-privileged and under-trial prisoners/convicts keeping in view the terrible havoc unleashed by the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
When an intellectual giant like Fali Sam Nariman whom I personally rate as the world's top jurist and it is not just me but his extremely impeccable credentials are acknowledged in legal field, it is not just India but the whole world which listens to him in silence
Treasa Josfine vs Kerala that a woman who is fully qualified cannot be denied of her right to be considered for employment on the ground that she is a woman and because the nature of the employment would require her to work during night hours.
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a Committee to suggest reforms in our criminal justice system which has been facing repeated criticism for its various drawbacks
Congress government's rule in Centre, Kapil Sibal who was Union Law Minister had written very categorically to UP Government for creating a high court bench for West UP at Meerut
completely about the truthfulness of the retracted confession and should corroborate his/her confession as it is unsafe to convict an accused person solely on the basis of the retracted confession
Thabir Sagar vs Odisha the practice of Advocate's clerks filing affidavits on behalf of parties is unacceptable. Such a practice is in gross violation of Rule 26 of the Orissa High Court Rules. It has therefore rightly directed its Registry to ensure that steps are taken forthwith to stop the practice of accepting such affidavits
COVID situation in UP, the Allahabad High Court has issued revised fresh guidelines for the functioning of all the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it.
amended its rules to make criticism and attack of Bar Council decisions by members a misconduct and ground for disqualification or suspension or removal of membership of a member from the Bar Council.
CJI NV Ramana who was appointed as the 48th CJI on 6th April, 2021 and took oath as CJI on 24th April 2021 has very rightly expressed his concern on the social media noise and how it adversely impacts the institutions also like judiciary to a great extent which actually should not be the case.
At the crucial meeting of the Central Action Committee. of more than 20 districts of Bar Association of West UP held at Aligarh
When finances are needed for the purpose of improving the judicial system at the lower levels, there is reluctance to make such finances available.
rarely ever booked and made to face the consequences which only serves to further encourage men in uniform to take it for granted to indulge in worst custodial torture
Tarun Saxena vs Union of India as ultra vires Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which bars lawyers from representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand was mowed down by an autorickshaw has sent shivers down the spine. The ghastly incident happened on morning of July 28 near the Magistrate colony of Dhanbad that was close to the Judge's residence.
Suman Chadha & Anr. vs. Central Bank of India in that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Rajasthan High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2020 which shall be applicable to the proceeding of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and all the Subordinate Courts of the Rajasthan with immediate effect.
Arun Singh Chauhan v/s MP deprecate the conduct of a practicing advocate who chose not to answer the repeated queries of the Court pertaining to the maintainability of his petition seeking issuance of a writ of quo warranto and regarding the non-impleadment of a necessary party
Dr.Mukut Nath Verma vs UoI Allahabad High Court imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on an advocate Dr Mukut Nath Verma after concluding that he unauthorisedly filed a writ petition on behalf of suspended and absconding IPS officer Mani Lal Patidar and also levelled serious allegations against state authorities and thereby misleading the Court.
Anil JS vs Kerala that instances of allegations about the police disrespecting the citizens were arriving at its doors with alarming regularity and therefore issued certain general directions in its judgment.
If there is one Judge on whom I have blind faith for his exemplary conduct throughout his brilliant career and who can never favour wrongly even his own son
Indianisation of our legal system is the need of the hour and it is crucial to make the justice delivery system more accessible and effective.
the gang war of different gangs have now reached right up to the court premises itself which are supposed to be the holiest shrines for getting justice.
It is not just for enjoying life or going for some holiday trip that lawyers of West UP repeatedly keep going on strike since last many decades.
CM Yogi Adityanath UP has progressed by leaps and bounds which one certainly cannot deny but why is it that it has just one High Court Bench only and that too just approximately 200 km away at the city famously called Nawab City
Just changing name of Allahabad to Prayagraj won't change the ground reality. It is a proven fact that High Court is still called Allahabad High Court and not Prayagraj High Court.
It is most shocking that all the Chief Justices of India from 1947 till 2000 were never shocked nor were any world famous jurist like Nani Ardeshir Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan among many others
Raggu Baniya @ Raghwendra vs UP has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to instruct the District Magistrates of all the districts to re-evaluate the cases for remission after 14 years of incarceration even if appeals in such cases are pending in the High Court.
Union Minister of State for Law and Justice – SP Singh Baghel who is also an MP from Agra again in Western UP and who just recently took over has made it clear that his ministry was open to the setting up of a Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UP.
Anil Kumar and Anr. Vs Amit that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Shashank Singh vs/ Honourable High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, a Judicial Officer regardless of his or her previous experience, as an Advocate, cannot apply and compete for appointment to any vacancy in the post of District Judge.
It must be stated at the very outset that it is quite bewildering and baffling to see that the state of UP which Ban ki moon who is the former UN Secretary General had slammed as the rape and crime capital of India
most powerfully raised vocally the legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is the crying need of the hour also.
Top