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.
Legal Services India

» Home
Sunday, December 22, 2024

Lawyers Of West UP Compelled To Strike For HC Bench

Posted in: Judiciary
Sun, Oct 3, 21, 11:11, 3 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 4428
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.

I will give you a talisman. Whenever you are in doubt or when the self becomes too much with you, apply the following test:

Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man whom you may have seen and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him. Will he gain anything by it? Will it restore him to a control over his own life and destiny? In other words, will it lead to Swaraj for the hungry and spiritually starving millions?

Then you will find your doubts and your self melting away.- Mahatma Gandhi

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. It should not be glossed over that when lawyers go on strike, it is their livelihood itself that gets affected but all the successive Central Governments have been totally impervious to their legitimate demands by which it is the poorest of poor, women, people of lower class who will benefit most as they will then not be required to travel all the way more than 700 km on an average of the 26 districts of West UP with population of more than 9 crore all the way to Allahabad to get justice which means that whole night and half day is wasted just on journey itself. How can lawyers who fight for the litigants cause remain nonchalant to their endless woes which the litigants have to face to travel such a long way and then spend so much of amount in staying there and hiring lawyer and what not!

We all witnessed how when the representatives of all the districts of West UP assembled at Meerut to chalk out their future plan for giving momentum to the agitation for a demand for High Court Bench in West UP under the Chairmanship of the Central Action Committee constituted for this purpose – Mahavir Singh Tyagi who is the current Chairman and also the President of the Meerut Bar Association there was tremendous anger among the lawyers that Centre was not taking a decision on this key issue since last many decades.

The lawyers of West UP have been going on strike every Saturday since May 1981 and since last more than four decades have been continuously doing so relentlessly and now it has been decided that the lawyers of West UP will also go on strike on every second and fourth Wednesday of every month and apart from this will also strike on the 29 September, 30 September, 1 October and so also 2 October, 2021 and will now further intensify their age old agitation! It is most baffling as to why can't Centre create more High Court Benches in UP which has maximum pending cases in India – more than 10 lakh cases in High Court and are on verge of touching one crore cases in lower courts!

While keeping what Gandhiji had said in mind, late Justice Dr AR Lakshmanan who was the Chairman of 18th Law Commission of India while submitting the 230th report titled Reforms In The Judiciary - Some Suggestions had very strongly recommended creation of more High Court Benches in different states which he submitted on August 5, 2009 but even after more than 12 years only one state gained from it and that is Karnataka itself where for just 4 and 8 districts two more High Court Benches were created at Dharwad and Gulbarga and not anywhere else till now even though it is UP that tops the maximum pending cases among all the states and West UP alone has more cases pending than that of whole of Karnataka and population wise also West UP at 9 crore stands way above Karnatka which has just 6 crore population yet has High Court also and 3 Benches also but what an unbeatable irony that for West UP Centre is not ready to concede even a single Bench or even a Circuit Bench! Most disgraceful!

Can anyone deny that even the 18th Law Commission in its 230th report candidly noted: In almost every High Court, there is huge pendency of cases and the present strength of the judges can hardly be said to be sufficient to cope with the alarming situation. It is also necessary that the work of the High Courts is decentralized, that is, more Benches are established in all States. If there is manifold increase in the strength of the judges and the staff, all cannot be housed in one campus. Therefore, the establishment of new Benches is necessary. It is also in the interest of the litigants.

The Benches should be so established that a litigant is not required to travel long. It is true that the new establishments will require money, but it is necessary as a development measure, particularly, when efforts are being made for all-round development of the country. Therefore, the money should not be a problem. We have to watch and protect the interest of the litigants. We must always keep in mind that the existence of judges and advocates is because of the litigants and they are there to serve their cause only. Sometimes, some advocates object to creation of new Benches and selection of new sites for construction of new buildings.

But they raise objections in their personal, limited interest. Creation of new Benches is certainly beneficial for the litigants and the lawyers and a beginning has to be made somewhere. A speedy trial is not only required to give quick justice but it is also an integral part of the fundamental right of life, personal liberty, as envisaged in article 21 of the Constitution. Article 39A of the Constitution provides for equal justice and free legal aid. The said article obligates the State to promote justice on a basis of equal opportunity and, in particular, provide free legal aid by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities?

Can anyone deny what Justice Krishna Iyer said : The way to eliminate this ghastly syndrome of judicial arrears is not more state force but making the system of justice, justices and justicing truly accessible to the have-nots by means of radical judicial reform that is decentralised and democratic. If this does not become possible, the suffering people may leave the courts and take to the streets. Does this not perfectly apply to UP where more than 1 crore cases are pending that is nearly half the cases pending all over India and here also West UP alone accounts for more than 50% cases? Still should a Bench not be created in West UP? You tell me. Even in other big States like Rajasthan, Orissa and many others, more high court benches should be created so that the huge backlog of pending cases comes crumbling down and the entire criminal justice system stand to gain in the whole process and undertrials gain quicker access to justice.

According to a statement by learned Andhra Pradesh High Court Judge Justice VV Rao in March 2010, The Indian judiciary would take 320 years to clear the backlog of 31.28 million cases pending in various courts including High Courts in the country'' is undeniable. That any attempt to speed up the disbursal of justice could go a long way in addressing the problem and what better than the setting up of more High Court benches and to start with which state is better than UP which is one of the biggest state in India, has maximum pending cases among all the states accounting for nearly half of the total pending cases and here too it is West UP which accounts for most of the cases among the pending cases in UP is undeniable but there is still only one Lucknow bench is quite strange! That setting up of more High Court benches will help the system to come out of its present inertia and address the endless woes of the poorest of the poor who suffer the most in the entire process of delivery of justice for no fault of theirs is undeniable but still there is no sign shown by government to create benches in needy places like West UP is quite strange!

What can be a bigger injustice for the common man of West UP than the harsh and lamentable fact that the High Courts of 8 states including Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Punjab, Delhi and above all even Lahore High Court are nearer to West UP in comparison to Allahabad High Court! Who suffers as a result? It is the common man who is the worst affected who has to spend one full night and half day on journey alone to travel all the way to Allahabad!

It must be asked: Why when UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population – more than 24 crore as CM Yogi Adityanath keeps pointing out every now and then, maximum districts - 75, maximum constituencies, maximum tehsils – 350, maximum MPs – 80, maximum MLAs - 404, maximum PM including Narendra Modi, maximum pending cases – more than 10 lakh and here too West UP accounts for more than half of pending cases as noted by Justice Jaswant Commission about 57%, maximum Judges which earlier was 160 and increased to 200 in high court, maximum vacancies of Judges - 75 in high court, maximum poverty, maximum villages more than one lakh as opposed to other states who have not more than few thousands at the most, maximum cities more than 700, maximum fake encounters killings, custody killings, custodial tortures, maximum dowry cases, maximum rape and gang rape cases, maximum acid throwing cases, maximum bride burning cases, maximum cases of human rights violations, maximum undertrials, maximum cases of crime, loot, arson and riots and here too West UP tops with Saharanpur riots, Meerut riots, Muzaffarnagar riots tarnishing our international reputation to the extent that former UN Secretary General Ban ki Moon termed UP as crime and rape capital of India and what not yet Centre is not prepared to create even a single bench for not just West UP but entire UP? Why when UP sends maximum MPs to Lok Sabha – 80, maximum MPs to Rajya Sabha – 30, maximum MLAs to State Assembly – 404 MLAs and maximum members to State Legislative Council – 100 MLAs and yet has least benches – only one and that too just 200 km away from Allahabad at Lucknow?

It is so shocking and disgusting to see that West UP is fast becoming the epicenter of all kinds of crimes, rapes, gangrapes, brutal murders, mass murders, dacoity, robbery and what not still no High Court Bench being created! Even the former Chairman of Bar Council of UP – Darvesh Yadav who was the first woman to assume the high office at young age of just 38 years was shot dead in the court premises itself soon after being elected in Agra in West UP! What is even more shocking to see is that all political parties barring Samajwadi Party have openly espoused the creation of a high court bench in West UP but still even after seventy four years of independence we see no sign of it happening anytime soon! What is most shocking is that inspite of West UP accounting for more than half of the crime cases all over UP, not a single high court bench has been created here since 1947 till now in 2021 even though a high court bench was created at Lucknow which is just about 150-200 km away from Allahabad way back on July 1, 1948!

Just changing name of Allahabad or Lucknow will not help! Allahabad was also a good name meaning Allah's favoured place and Lucknow is also known as City of Nawabs! Why Centre feels that only the people living in Nawab City that is Lucknow should have High Court Bench and no other city in whole of UP! Are we still slaves of Nawab? I mean no disrespect but why can't a High Court Bench be created anywhere else? People of Lucknow and adjoining places can't travel just 200 km away for seeking justice at High Court in Allahabad and so Bench was created there but people of erstwhile hilly areas of UP now part of Uttarakhand were expected to travel like slaves thousands of kilometers away all the way to Allahabad which is even far away from Lucknow! Can on earth there be anything more senseless than this? Yet Centre as also our judiciary like shameless spectators just kept watching everything till people agitated and Uttarakhand became a separate state and then pompously a High Court was created at Nainital! Same holds true for West UP where people have to travel more than 700 km on an average to Allahabad to get justice!

Truth be told, no CJI from 1947 to 2021 has ever cared to think about it even though CJI NV Ramana expressed his concern just recently on the huge number of pending criminal cases in the Allahabad High Court and urged the Bar and Bench to work together to resolve it! He said cogently, commendably and convincingly that:
I do not want to point any fingers or lay any blame regarding the pendency in the Allahabad High Court relating to criminal cases, which is very worrying. Should still more High Court Benches not be created in UP?

It cannot be denied that while replying on the pendency of cases in various courts in Uttar Pradesh, Union Law Ministry's answer in Lok Sabha on July 28, 2021 was: Allahabad High Court including Lucknow Bench – 5,68,987 (Civil) and 4,51,406 (Criminal); Subordinate Courts – 18,41,155 (Civil) and 73,94,155 (Criminal); Fast Track Courts – 5,43,081. Still denying UP even a single more Bench other than one at Lucknow for just 12 districts since 1948 till 2021 can ever be justified on any ground? On the recommendations of Justice Jaswant Singh Commission, High Court Bench was created at Aurangabad in Maharashtra which already had 2 Benches at Nagpur and Panaji and which tops in state list index of justice delivery and similarly Benches were created on its recommendations at Jalpaiguri in West Bengal, at Madurai in Tamil Nadu but for UP it recommended 3 Benches for undivided UP at Agra, Dehradun and Nainital yet not a single was created! Can this ever be justified on any ground? This is what the CJI must look into independently and then decide on it urgently! It cannot be kept in abeyance any longer now! It is the common man who will gain the most!

Similarly in Bihar also which has not even a single Bench must have as it is counted as a state where law and order is not good! Why peaceful states have 2 or 3 Benches but lawless States like Bihar or even Jharkhand have not even one? It is high time that Centre does something on this also!

Above all, we cannot gloss over that even former CJI Ranjan Gogoi spoke truth to power when he clearly, cogently, categorically and convincingly pointed out that setting up of more High Court Benches in UP is the job of the Centre to do and not of the judiciary! This he so pointed out while dismissing the plea by a woman lawyer KL Chitra for setting up a High Court Bench in West UP as the women and poor people of more than 26 districts have to travel more than 700 km all the way to Allahabad to get justice which means one full night and the population is more than 9 crore but he appreciated her arguments as they had force in them! All those in judiciary including lawyers must speak truth to power and ask Centre that why when on the recommendations of Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge – Justice Jaswant Singh set up by former PM late Mrs Indira Gandhi to look into where all High Court Benches were needed in late 1970s approved the setting up of a High Court Bench at Aurangabad in Maharashtra which already had 2 Benches at Nagpur and Panaji as also at Jalpaiguri in West Bengal and at Madurai in Tamil Nadu but why not a single High Court Bench was created in UP for which it had recommended 3 High Court Benches in undivided UP at Agra, Dehradun and Nainital? It is here where not just the Centre but even the judiciary too has floundered most badly!

To top it all, even now no one is ready to do anything on this! Why when Allahabad High Court tops in the pending cases among all the States in India and also it is the biggest court in whole of Asia as pointed out by none other than UP CM Yogi Adityanath himself and has maximum Bar Council members in the world as pointed out in the website of UP Bar Council itself has it got just one High Court Bench and that too so near at Lucknow which is capital of UP and just about 200 km away from Allahabad where High Court itself is located and not anywhere else?

On a personal note, Shri KP Sharma who is an eminent criminal lawyer from Meerut and also the former General Secretary of Meerut Bar who first enlightened me on the burning issue of setting up of a high court bench in West UP had expressed his deep anguish in 2005 over the nonchalance and insensitive approach of both the State and Centre regarding this and not conceding to it inspite of acknowledging fully the dire necessity of the same in the interest of millions of people of West UP who are punished for being born here. He also very rightly lamented that:
What a pity that Lahore High Court in Pakistan is nearer to the people of West UP as compared to Allahabad High Court. The lawyers of West UP obviously don't enjoy going on strike every Saturday since 1981 because ultimately it is our own livelihood which is most adversely affected which the world must understand and appreciate. This decision was taken unanimously by all lawyers of West UP as a token protest against the abject callousness and utter disregard for the genuine grievances of a common people who have to suffer the most especially those who are very poor and can't afford to incur the huge expenses relating to travelling more than 600 or 700 km or even more, engaging a lawyer, staying in Allahabad etc. It is the illiterate people who are fooled the most in the whole process by cunning people of whom there is no dearth and government too is not doing any good by turning a blind eye to the endless woes suffered by the people of West UP since independence which is most disgusting to note. The condition of educated and financially well off is not much better either especially the middle class. We know how much we struggled financially and otherwise also when we went on strike for 6 months at a row from July to December in 2001 and ended only when we were assured of the Bench by representatives of Centre but we were deceived!

Even in 2014-15, lawyers of West UP went on strike for 3 to 4 months continuously and in 2009 also for weeks together and so also in many other years also but to no avail! It is high time and now the government must take prompt action in creating a Bench of High Court for the millions of people residing in West UP! This issue cannot be kept in cold storage any longer and merits prompt action! No more excuses! No more delays! No more ifs and buts!

Even Yogi Aditynath had thundered for a High Court Bench at Gorakhpur in 1999 as an MP but even after being CM for nearly five years we still see not even a single Bench being created anywhere even though UP is doing good under his able leadership in all other fields! Centre must bail him out on this front also by deciding quickly and positively on this also! Are Ayodhya, Mathura, Meerut, Agra, Gorakhpur, Varanasi, Jhansi, Kanpur etc all worthless cities except the one earlier famous by name of Allah and one famous even now by name of city of Nawabs? We must come out of Mughal and Sultan culture and Centre must think of people from other places also apart from Allahabad now renamed as Prayagraj and Lucknow! Sadly, we don't see this happening in last 75 years which is the worst tragedy that I have witnessed at least in my life and is beyond comprehension! Most shocking!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Legal Services India

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
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan
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.
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