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
Monday, December 30, 2024

UP Deserves Maximum High Court Benches And Not Minimum And West UP At Least One

Posted in: Constitutional Law
Sat, Aug 19, 23, 10:39, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 7323
High Court Bench in last 77 years in any nook and corner of Uttar Pradesh at any city other than Lucknow known famously as Nawab City

One really wonders time and again as to why Centre has so fiercely opposed even a single more High Court Bench in last 77 years in any nook and corner of Uttar Pradesh at any city other than Lucknow known famously as Nawab City where it was just not needed at all as it is so close to Allahabad itself where High Court is located and where it was created way back in 1948 itself less than a year after independence in July! That’s all! After that we see no High Court Bench was created in last 77 years.

It must be asked: Does Centre want a difference of at least 100 years between the Bench in Lucknow in Eastern UP and a Bench at any place in Western UP whose population is alone more than 10 crore and more than half of the pending cases are from West UP? Is Centre waiting for 2048 to create a Bench in West UP? Can it be justified from any angle that the litigants of 30 districts of West UP have been attached not even till Lucknow which falls more than 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice? Can on earth there be anything more shameful than this?

In no way can Centre wash away the unpalatable truth which is so demoralizing, disgusting, degrading and disastrous that Uttar Pradesh which has maximum population among all the States more than 25 crores which is more than the population of 16 small States put together and so also maximum pending cases more than 10 lakhs in High Courts and about one crore cases in lower courts and here too more than half of the pending cases are from West UP and still has just one Bench only and both High Court and a single Bench are in Eastern UP alone and that too just at a distance of about 230 km only even though in 1981 it was agreed that the distance between High Court and bench should not be less than 300 km! It is high time and Centre must move beyond the myopic view that only Eastern UP alone is fit for both High Court and Bench and not any other region which according to Centre are legally worthless just not fit to be given a Bench! Why is Centre most disinterested on such a sensitive issue which directly impacts population of more than 10 crore people of West UP?

It is high time and Centre must move beyond the myopic view that only Eastern UP alone is fit for both High Court and Bench and not any other region which really baffles me most! Why so much of opacity in creation of High Court Benches? Why no transparency? That is the nub of the problem!

It merits no reiteration that Centre must take a clear stand on it and not indulge in frequent flip-flop over it as we have been seeing since last more than 77 years! Viewed in this light, it can be easily surmised that Centre has been most deadly biased in favouring only one particular region in regard to setting up of a Bench which is most unfortunate and must be strongly and roundly condemned! I have just no inkling as to why Centre has been so deadly biased on this without any logic in this blatant, brazen and blind discrimination against West UP and other regions as compared to Eastern UP and so also other States.

Why we see that a peaceful State like Maharashtra which tops in the State list of Justice Index Ranking has maximum High Court Benches and Uttar Pradesh just one and West UP which owes for more than half of the total number of pending cases has none? If this is not making an open mockery of Article 14 of the Constitution then what else is? Why our Judges never hold Centre accountable for it?

As any of those who reside in any of the districts of West UP know, the lawyers of West UP will again assemble as usual on August 19, 2023 that is Saturday on which day lawyers boycott work in protest against denial of a Bench to West UP under the banner of the Central Action Committee at Bulandshahr as has been happening since last more than 42 years since May 1981 after the lawyers of more than 20 districts of West UP and so also those districts who now form part of Uttarakhand decided to form a united forum to pursue the struggle relentlessly for a High Court Bench in West UP in May 1981 in protest against Centre’s most ridiculous, retrograde and reprehensible decision displaying open partiality by not allowing creation of even one High Court Bench in undivided UP even though Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by a former Supreme Court Judge had recommended three High Court Benches for it at Agra, Dehradun and Nainital while wasting no time in creating a High Court Bench in Aurangabad in Maharashtra in 1985 which already had multiple High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji and so also at Jalpaiguri in West Bengal which already had a Bench at Port Blair in Andaman and Nicobar islands for just 3 lakh people but for more than 10 crore people of West UP we saw Centre did not approve even a single High Court Bench and when the people of hilly areas agitated then Centre in 2000 gave them High Court itself by creating it as a State with population of about 88 lakh at that time but as long as it formed part of UP, it refused to create two Benches at Dehradun and Nainital as recommended by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission!

It is most shocking that UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population – more than 25 crore, maximum districts 75, maximum constituencies 80, maximum MPs 80, maximum MLAs 404, maximum PM including Narendra Modi who represents Varanasi as an MP, 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 both in High Court – 160 and also in lower courts, maximum vacancies of Judges about 60 in High Court and 1200 in lower courts, maximum members in UP Bar Council more than 1 lakh and which is also the largest Bar Council in the world as claimed in the website itself of UP Bar Council yet the former Chairman of UP Bar Council – Darvesh Yadav who was the first woman to get appointed to this post was murdered cold blooded right in court premises in Agra which is again in West UP on June 12, 2019 by pumping bullets on her head and stomach, maximum poverty, maximum villages more than one lakh the exact number being 107040, maximum gram panchayats at 74626, maximum fake encounters killings, maximum custody killings, maximum dowry cases, maximum bride burning cases, maximum cases of human rights violations, maximum robberies, maximum dacoities, 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 till now end of 2023 staring us from 1948 when a bench was created in Lucknow which is so close to Allahabad is not prepared to create even a single bench for not just West UP but for the entire UP? Area of West UP is 98,933 square km and accounts for 33.61 percent of total area of UP and has 30 districts yet no bench but Lucknow with just 62,363 square km and 12 districts has a Bench!

I can’t make a head or tail of it as to why Lucknow which is so near to Allahabad has Bench since 1948 and West UP even after 77 years of independence has none and worst of all the litigants of West UP attached not even with Lucknow which falls 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice? When Centre can amend the penal laws made by Britishers as we saw recently then why can’t Centre also amend the most stupid decision taken by Centre in 1948 to create a single High Court for the most populated State of India at Lucknow only and not a single for Western UP even though more than half of the pending cases are from West UP? How long will Centre keep ducking the all-important Bench issue in West UP?

I have just no doubt in my mind, not even an iota of doubt that denying most mercilessly even a single High Court Bench to West UP and attaching the litigants of West UP not even with Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad is the worst travesty of justice and is the most egregious violation of Article 14 of Constitution which promises right to equality as a fundamental right to all citizens of India! The creation of a Bench in West UP is bound to bring about a paradigm shift in the criminal justice delivery system by making it easily available at doorsteps thus making it more fair, efficient and responsive to the needs of the people. The central problem here is: Centre is just not ready to budge on Bench issue which I find most perplexing. Why can’t Centre be more flexible on setting up of more High Court Benches in UP?

Suffice it to say: Supreme Court which is the last ray of hope for the people must at least now intervene should have the guts, gall and gumption to differ with the famous old adage that:
Might is right” and should not restrain itself in speaking out most vocally that how can the most populated State of India with maximum pending cases have just one Bench only when other States with far lesser pending cases and lesser population like Maharashtra, Assam, Karnataka, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh can have multiple High Court Benches and here too why West UP which owes for more than half of the total number of pending cases has none? Why the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India prepared by the eminent legal luminary and former Supreme Court Judge late Dr AR Lakshmanan advocating for creation of more High Court Benches has not been uniformly implemented even after 14 years after its historic recommendations having been submitted and why only very few States have multiple High Court Benches even though the crime rate in those States is very low as compared to States like UP and Rajasthan which have just one Bench and lawless Bihar where there is none? This burning issue cannot be kept in the backburner any longer!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) 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
This article critically analyses the concept of Parliamentary privileges enshrined under Article 105 of the Constitution of India along with various judicial pronouncement.
Here we have two legal systems, one tracing its roots to Roman law and another originating in England or we can say one codified and the other not codified or one following adversarial type of system other inquisitorial or one is continental whereas the other one Anglo-American
The principle of gender equality is enshrined in the Indian Constitution in its Preamble, Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties and Directive Principles.
The constitutional interpretations metamorphose a non-federal constitution into a federal one which results into a shift from reality to a myth
What justice is? and why one wants access to it? are important question which need to be addressed in introductory part of the literature. Justice is a concept of rightness, fairness based on ethics, moral, religion and rationality.
It is not the whole Act which would be held invalid by being inconsistent with Part III of the Constitution but only such provisions of it which are violative of the fundamental rights
Thomas Mann had in 1924 said; a man’s dying is more the survivor’s affair than his own’. Today his words are considered to be true as there is a wide range of debate on legalizing euthanasia.
India became one of 135 countries to make education a fundamental right of every child, when the Parliament passed the 86th Constitutional amendment in 2002.
Following are the salient features of the amended Lokpal bill passed by Parliament:
Good governance is associated with efficient and effective administration in a democratic framework. It is considered as citizen-friendly, citizen caring and responsive administration. Good governance emerged as a powerful idea when multilateral and bilateral agencies like the World Bank, UNDP, OECD, ADB, etc.
A democratic society survives by accepting new ideas, experimenting with them, and rejecting them if found unimportant. Therefore it is necessary that whatever ideas the government or its other members hold must be freely put before the public.
This article describes relationship between Indian Legislative provisions and freedom of press.
This article gives an overview of the Definition of State as per Article 12 Of the Constitution of India with emphasis on Relevant case law
Coming straight to the nub of the matter, The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Bir Singh v Delhi Jal Board held that Pan India Reservation Rule in force in National Capital Territory of Delhi is in accord with the constitutional scheme relating to services under the Union and the States/Union Territories
Jasvinder Singh Chauhan case that denial of passport or its non-renewal without assigning reasons as listed under the Passports Act, 1967 infringes the fundamental rights. who was praying for the renewal of his passport and issuance of a fresh passport to him.
In Indian Young Lawyers Association v/s Kerala has very laudably permitted entry of women of all age groups to the Sabarimala temple, holding that 'devotion cannot be subjected to gender discrimination'. It is one of the most progressive and path breaking judgment that we have witnessed in last many decades just like in the Shayara Bano case
Sadhna Chaudhary v U.P. has upheld the dismissal of a judicial officer on grounds of misconduct, on the basis of two orders passed by her in land acquisition cases. This has certainly sent shockwaves across Uttar Pradesh especially in judicial circles.
The term judiciary refers to the higher officials of the government i.e Judges of all the hierarchy of the courts. The constitution of India gives greater importance to the independence of the Indian judiciary. Every democratic country set up it’s own independent judiciary for the welfare of it’s citizens.
various allowances, perquisites, salaries granted to mp and mla
This article presents a glimpse of human life through the constitutional approach.
Er. K. Arumugam v. V. Balakrishnan In the contempt jurisdiction, the court has to confine itself to the four corners of the order alleged to have been disobeyed
As Parliamentarians, we remain the guardians and protectors of fundamental rights, and always need to ensure we are fulfilling our many responsibilities, as legislators, representatives and role models. to uphold the rights set out in the Declaration, particularly as regards safeguarding political and civil society space.
Kashmiri Sikh Community and others v. J&K has very rightly upheld PM's Employment Package 2009 for Kashmiri Pandits living in the Valley.
The Supreme Court on 12th September stuck down the penal provision of adultery enshrined under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code.
President A. Akeem Raja case it has been made amply clear that, Freedom of religion can't trump demands of public order. Public order has to be maintained at all cost. There can be no compromise on it.
Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghosh who is a former Supreme Court Judge and former Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh High Court who retired in May 2017 and a current member of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was appointed as India's first Lokpal
colonial era Official Secrets Act (OSA) as many feel that it has far outlived its utility. Before drawing any definite conclusion on such an important issue, we need to certainly analyse this issue dispassionately from a close angle.
Sri Aniruddha Das Vs The State Of Assam held that bandhs / road/rail blockades are illegal and unconstitutional and organizers must be prosecuted.
ABout changes in Changes in Constitutional (Forty-Second) Amendment Act
Definition of State as per Article 12 f the Constitution of India with emphasis on Relevant case law
Justice KS Puttaswamy (Retd) and Anr vs UOI held that right to privacy is a fundamental right.
You want India to defend Kashmir, feed its people, give Kashmiris equal rights all over India. But you want to deny India and Indians all rights in Kashmir. I am a Law Minister of India, I cannot be a party to such a betrayal of national interests.
Faheema Shirin RK Vs State of Kerala and others that right to access internet is a fundamental right forming part of right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
the Supreme Court of UK has gone all guns blazing by categorically and courageously pronouncing in Gilham v Ministry of Justice the whistle-blowing protection envisaged under Employment
The Constitution directs the government that High Court shall have power, throughout in relation to it jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, directions, orders or writs, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose also.
What is child labour ? Why bonded in india?
Shiv Sena And Ors. Vs UOI whether the newly sworn in Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis enjoys majority in the State Assembly or not! This latest order was necessitated after Shiv Sena knocked the doors of the Apex Court along with Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and Congress.
Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), saying they are two different things. We all saw in different news channels that many people who were protesting did not had even the elementary knowledge of CAA but were protesting vehemently just on the provocation of leaders from different political parties
Sanmay Banerjee v/s. West Bengal in exercise of Constitutional writ jurisdiction on the appellate side has that people have every right to criticize dispensation running the country, being legislature, executive or judiciary
On May 16, 1946 Cabinet Mission Plan arbitrarily announced to group British Indian states in A, B & C categories. Assam was kept in Group C with Bengal, creating a predominantly Muslim zone in Eastern India like the one proposed to be setup in western India.
Top political leaders and Members of Parliament from Left Parties have very often raised the questions of atrocities and accommodation of these minorities even in the Parliament. Unfortunately when this dream of opening the doors of India for her cultural children was about to be realized
Why is it that even after more than 81 days the blocking of road at Shaheen Bagh in Delhi is continuing uninterrupted since 15 December 2019? Why is it that Centre allowed this to happen? Why were they not promptly evicted?
The Basic Structure Of Indian Constitution Or Doctrine Applies During The Time Of Amendments In Constitution Of India. These Basic Structure State That The Government Of India Cann’t Touch Or Destroy
Arjun Aggarwal Vs Union Of India And Anr (stay) dismissed a PIL filed by a petitioner who is a law student. The PIL had challenged the June 30 order of the Ministry of Home Affairs wherein considerable relaxations from lockdown were operationalised under Unlock 1.0
This blog deals explains the Right to Access Internet as a Fundamental Right under Constitution of India and the reasonable restrcitions which it is subject to and whether it can be considered to be a fundamental right or not.
This article talks about what exactly is meant by the doctrine of colourable legislation, how various case laws have come up time and again to reiterate its meaning and how the supreme court views this doctrine. To address legislative transparency for some improvements in the legislative system, colorable legislation is necessary to be studied
Shri Naini Gopal Vs The Union of India and Ors. in Case No. – LD-VC-CW-665 of 2020 has minced no words to hold that: We need to remind the Bank that the pension payable to the employees upon superannuation is a property under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India
Article 25 of the Constitution of India, thus ruled that the immediate family members of Covid-19 victims be permitted to perform the funeral rites of the deceased subject to them following certain precautionary guidelines
Top