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
Saturday, January 11, 2025

Centre Must Concede For A High Court Bench In West UP

Posted in: Judiciary
Sat, Aug 19, 23, 10:43, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 7134
Nawab City where it was just not needed at all as it is so close to Allahabad itself where High Court

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.

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 if this was not enough, when former PM Mrs Indira Gandhi had appointed Justice Jaswant Singh Commission which was headed by former Supreme Court Judge – Justice Jaswant Singh who was also the former Chief Justice of Jammu and Kashmir High Court to look into where all High Court Benches should be created and it recommended maximum 3 High Court Benches for undivided UP – one at Agra and 2 circuit benches at Nainital and Dehradun but Centre most stupidly, most shamelessly and most senselessly decided not to create even a single High Court Bench for UP anywhere even though it happily created a High Court Bench at Aurangabad in Maharashtra which already had two High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji, and so also Benches were created at Madurai in Tamil Nadu and Jalpaiguri in West Bengal for just 6 districts which already had Bench at Port Blair for just 3 lakh people! Why we witnessed Supreme Court kept watching everything like a helpless spectator? Why the people of hilly areas had to travel foolishly all the way more than thousand kilometers all the way to Allahabad as all the districts were attached with Allahabad and not with Lucknow which was still closer even though not so close? How disgraceful! How can judiciary and that too Apex Court so callously watch everything just like a mute spectator? It could have taken suo motu notice just like it did after the Lakhimpur Kheri incident and now in Manipur but it has never done till now! I still hope fervently!

Why the High Court and Benches of 8 states and above all even Lahore high court in Pakistan is nearer to West UP as compared to Allahabad? It was to protest this raw step motherly treatment that the lawyers of West UP went on one month hunger strike in 1978! In 1985-86 the lawyers did many Padyatras also demanding Bench! Again the lawyers of West UP were compelled to go on strike for full 6 months from July to December 2001 demanding the creation of a High Court Bench in West UP yet no action taken? Can anyone in Centre even dream as to how the lawyers managed to strike for so long thereby depriving themselves from their only source of livelihood for full 6 months and how they struggled to meet their daily end yet no bench created?

Even in 2014-15, the lawyers of West UP went on strike for about 5 months and even boycotted Lok Adalats and protested whole night outside the court but again Centre just gave empty assurances but nothing materialized on ground! Even in 2009, the lawyers of West UP went on strike and even called a bandh in whole of West UP to protest the decision to not create a single bench here and went on strike many times! Even in 2010, the lawyers of West UP went on strike for a month demanding Bench. Yet we find that Centre just glosses over everything maintaining a stoic conspiratorial silence and our Judges also have never cared to address it which is so shocking that cannot be described in words!

I am extremely devastated to see how Centre has so contemptuously kicked aside the legitimate claim for a High Court Bench in West UP in last 77 years of independence while allowing creation of a Bench in 1948 itself so close to Allahabad and yet not one Chief Justice from Allahabad High Court or a Supreme Court Judge ever spoke out against it! My eyes well up in tears to see how shamelessly, senselessly and stupidly Centre has always been most adamant in denying not just West UP but all regions of UP except Eastern UP even a single High Court Bench! Why States with less population, less pending cases and less crime rate have multiple Benches like Maharashtra, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal among others?

The most ticklish question to consider here is: Why other states where pending cases in High Courts didn’t exceed even one lakh were given more Benches and which already had Benches like Maharashtra, Karnataka and Assam among others but UP was not given even a single more Bench after 1948? Why UP has more than 10 lakh pending cases in High Court and nearly one crore cases in lower courts which is more than half of the states cases put together and still it has just one High Court Bench and that too so close to Allahabad?

Why Centre has most contemptuously refused to create even a single High Court Bench in any nook and corner of UP including at West UP which has 30 districts? Why so many former PMs like Atal Bihari Vajpayee who raised the demand for a Bench for West UP at Meerut right inside Parliament in 1986, Mrs Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Dr Manmohan Singh among others had all appreciated the dire need for a High Court Bench in West UP yet not even a single was created anywhere in UP? Why another lawless state Bihar has not even a single High Court Bench? Why so many UP CM like Dr Sampoornanand, ND Tiwari, Rajnath Singh supported the demand for Bench in West UP still none?

Let me say this with a sense of responsibility: Centre is definitely complicit in doing its best to ensure that open partiality is done by approving one more Bench for States like Maharashtra which already had multiple High Court Benches and we see that for Uttar Pradesh for which maximum three were recommended not one was allowed to be created! Denying even a single Bench to West UP is an out and out cheating with the more than 10 crore people living here for which Centre is definitely fully culpable and this open cheating cannot be ever condoned under any circumstances! The reasons forwarded for denying a Bench in West UP are absolutely freakish!

One still hopes that there is a modicum of realization in Centre that a High Court Bench in West UP is the crying need of the hour and its denial has compelled the litigants to travel whole night and half day in just travelling alone all the way not even till Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice! Denial of a Bench has an adverse and devastating impact on the litigants which culminates in dooming the very justice delivery system of the country which alone explains why the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India very strongly recommended the creation of more High Court Benches but 14 years down the lane, it still lies unimplemented! Why has Centre so completely messed up in UP by not allowing even a single High Court Bench in whole of UP other than at Lucknow?

Still more loathsome is to see how Centre has most contemptuously snubbed the more than 75 years old demand for a Bench in West UP! Why is it that only for southern States like Karnataka we see multiple High Court Benches being created at a lightening speed as in 2008 we saw for just 4 and 8 districts at Dharwad and Gulbarga two Benches were created so promptly? Why the same promptness is never shown for Uttar Pradesh where lawyers are agitating since so many decades yet no Bench created since 1948 till now and so also in Bihar where there is not even a single Bench and Rajasthan where there is again just one Bench at Jaipur only?

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
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.
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