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
Friday, January 10, 2025

Centre Must Relent On The Key Issue Of High Court Bench Demand In West UP?

Posted in: Judiciary
Tue, Oct 31, 23, 16:17, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 10262
under the banner of the Central Action Committee at Ghaziabad as has been happening since last more than 42 years since May 1981

As any of those who reside in any of the districts of West UP know, the senior lawyers of West UP comprising of present and former President and General Secretary of 22 districts of West UP will again assemble as usual on October 28, 2023 under the banner of the Central Action Committee at Ghaziabad as has been happening since last more than 42 years since May 1981 after the lawyers of 22 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 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 as recommended by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission at Dehradun and Nainital respectively due to which the litigants of hilly areas had to travel thousands of kilometers all the way not even till Lucknow which falls about 230 km earlier but right till Allahabad to seek justice!

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 3 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 with 2024 about to start from 1948 when a Bench was created in Lucknow which is so close to Allahabad and where it was just not required at all is just 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!



Why is it that the people of West UP of 30 districts foolishly were compelled and are still compelled to travel all the way to Allahabad which is far away even from Lucknow where High Court Bench is located and averages 600 to 750 km on an average? Most shamefully and most disgracefully, why is it that the people of Uttarakhand had to travel thousands of kilometers all the way shamelessly, senselessly and stupidly all the way not to even Lucknow but right upto Allahabad which is most horrendous for more than 50 years from 1947 till end of 2000 when a separate state was created termed as Uttarakhand when people agitated violently and a High Court was then allotted for them?

As if this was not enough, the UPA government headed by former PM Manmohan Singh pompously decided to create 2 more High Court Benches for Karnataka which already had a Bench at Hubli for just 4 and 8 districts at Dharwad and Gulbarga respectively in 2008 first as Circuit Bench and then later in 2013 as full Bench as the Karnataka leaders who were very influential were Law Ministers and cared for Karnataka! The lawyers of West UP headed by senior lawyers and Chairman and Secretary of Central Action Committee constituted for setting up a High Court Bench in 1981 repeatedly met the PM, UPA Chairperson Mrs Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi among others but all that UP got was a big slap on its face as not a single Bench was allowed anywhere in UP! For more than 10 crore people of West UP alone no Bench but for just 6 crore people of Karnataka, Centre felt most proud to create 2 more Benches for just 4 and 8 districts at Dharwad and Gulbarga which already had a High Court and a Bench at Hubli which makes me hang my head in shame! This despite the fact that Karnataka is a very peaceful state and in UP we see how all opposition parties keep beating their chest on lawlessness yet has just one Bench so close to Allahabad at Lucknow where it was just not needed at all!

But why blame UPA alone? Even the incumbent PM Narendra Damodardas Modi has ensured that not a single High Court is approved anywhere not just in West UP but in any hook and corner of UP even though it is UP which primarily decides which party will rule in Delhi! The incumbent CM of UP – Yogi Aditynath had thundered with full might for a High Court Bench in Gorakhpur in 1999 while he was MP from there right inside Parliament and in 2015 even placed a private member bill with tears in eyes but he cannot be blamed as it is Centre which has to take the final call on this! Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee had as Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha demanded High Court Bench in 1986 for West UP at Meerut yet we saw nothing translating on ground!

It cannot be lightly dismissed that none other than the former CJI Ranjan Gogoi while in office as CJI had categorically appreciated the dire need of a High Court Bench in West UP when a woman lawyer named KL Chitra raised this burning issue in her PIL but Gogoi made it clear that it was for the Centre to take the final call on this! But Centre led by PM Narendra Damodardas Modi is very firm that what Jawaharlal Nehru did in 1948 to allot Bench only for Nawab City that is Lucknow should be always maintained and in his more than 9 years as PM, he has proudly done that about which I myself feel most ashamed as the most historic recommendations of 230th report of Law Commission recommending creation of more Benches have been thrown in the dustbin! This despite the irrefutable fact that BJP tall leaders like Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, Union Minister like Gen VK Singh among others have always reiterated support for a Bench as the people of 30 districts are compelled to travel whole night and half day all the way to Allahabad most foolishly which is truly incomprehensible!

The whole point is: Why is Centre taking such an exceedingly long span of time of more than 75 years to decide on creation of a Bench in West UP when it took no time for Lucknow where it was just not needed as it is so close to Allahabad? Why Centre’s lofty words of providing justice at doorsteps has never matched in action with no Bench being set up in UP and lawless Bihar? Why Telangana with just 3.5 crore population was given Statehood by Centre in June 2014 while most disgracefully coughing groundless excuses for not granting even a Bench to West UP even though Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself had very strongly recommended for the same?

It must be asked: How can both CJI and Centre close their eyes to the unpalatable ground reality that UP tops the States list in having maximum pending cases and here too it is West UP which owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP and still has no Bench? Can CJI and Centre both close their eyes, ears and mind to this unpalatable ground reality? Why is it that a peaceful State like Maharashtra which happens to be the home State of the incumbent CJI Dr DY Chandrachud has maximum High Court Benches and UP slammed by former UN Secretary General Ban ki Moon as the rape and crime capital of India has minimum and West UP which owes for more than half of the total number of pending cases has none?

Centre must definitely act now and not just keep shelling out one pretext or the other to ensure that not a single Bench is created in either UP or Bihar and peaceful States like Telangana with just 3.5 crore population promptly being conferred Statehood itself! Justice must not only be done but should be seen to be done which we don’t see happening in the case of setting up of High Court Benches in UP and lawless Bihar due to which lawyers go on strike every Saturday since May 1981 till October 2023 and went on strike so many times as for 6 months in 2001 and for six months in 2014-15 and strike for a month or so every two or three years once! There can be no gainsaying that Centre must at least now step forward, display some magnanimity and not make it a prestige issue because when 2 High Court Benches for just 4 and 8 districts only can be created in Karnataka where lawyers never protested then why can’t even one High Court Bench be not created in 30 districts of West UP where lawyers have been agitating so hard so that the litigants don’t have to travel whole night and a day all the way right uptill Allahabad to seek justice? One cannot gauge the exact reason as to why West UP cannot have a High Court Bench!

What really predominates my mind most of the time is the moot question worth billion dollars: Why has Centre allowed openly such a worst mockery of the concept of equality as encapsulated in the Article 14 of the Constitution at the first place? Why even Apex Court has never exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to speak up on it by taking up the matter suo motu? Let’s still fervently hope that it takes up so in the days ahead!

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