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

Murder Of Democracy In Discriminating On HC Bench In Different Regions And Different States

Posted in: Judiciary
Sat, Feb 10, 24, 10:43, 12 Months ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 10221
Why is he looking at the camera and then quietly defacing the ballot? This is a mockery of democracy

It is obvious that he has defaced the ballot. This man has to be prosecuted…Why is he looking at the camera and then quietly defacing the ballot? This is a mockery of democracy… He is murdering democracy. Is this the way to conduct an election? We will not allow democracy to be murdered like this. The great stabilizing force in the country is the purity of the election process… What is happening here?

This was observed so very sagaciously by a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by CJI Dr DY Chandrachud while referring to the Returning Officer at the Chandigarh Mayoral elections. There can be just no quibbling with what the CJI-led Bench of the Apex Court has observed and there must be zero tolerance for any such action which shakes the very credibility of our electoral system and our democratic system and those guilty must be definitely most strictly punished! No denying it!

What however leaves me completely flabbergasted is that why most shockingly even Supreme Court and CJI never says a word on the most blind, brutal, blatant and baseless discrimination when it comes to setting up of High Court Benches in different States and different regions in India? How can anyone be ever oblivious of the irrefutable fact that Uttar Pradesh has maximum pending cases in India among all the States with maximum population and still has just one Bench only in Eastern UP at Lucknow created in 1948 even though it is West UP which owes for more than half of the total number of pending cases in India for which even Justice Jaswant Singh Commission also appointed by Centre itself recommended a Bench yet no Bench created and maximum 3 High Court Benches were recommended for undivided UP in late 1970s yet not one created and Maharashtra which is the home State of incumbent CJI Dr DY Chandrachud which tops in the latest Justice Index Ranking of States List and which already had multiple High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji was given one more at Aurangabad? Why States like Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka whose total population of 7 crores and 6 crores is less than West UP population of 10 crores and they have not just High Court but multiple High Court Benches also and West UP does not have even a Bench due to which litigants have to travel whole night and half day all the way till Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest injustice and yet why Supreme Court never takes suo motu cognizance of it? Why lawless Bihar with 15 crores population has not even a single Bench?

It is most shocking to learn from the news report by Mr Sandeep Rai in ‘The Times of India’ newspaper dated January 28, 2024 that on January 19, the Special Secretary of the UP State Government had written to the Director General of the Allahabad High Court over taking necessary action as per the rules regarding the establishment of a High Court Division Bench in West Uttar Pradesh but in the next 24 hours, the Special Secretary made a U-turn and cancelled his letter (TOI has accessed both the letters). Gajender Singh Dhama who is a former President of Meerut Bar Association very rightly pointed out that:
A Bench is a necessity for a simple reason: almost 54% of all cases that reach the HC come from West UP’s 22 districts. They (HC lawyers) are concerned about their business but not about the plight of litigants. For the last couple of years, a litigant has to be physically present in the Allahabad HC for photos and other documents and have to rush to High Court after travelling so long for whole night and half day. The Lahore HC is closer to Meerut than the Allahabad HC. Litigants have to travel 700 km to reach the HC to get a Bench. Most disgusting indeed!

It cannot be denied that State governments also acknowledge the need for a Bench but they succumb in front of the unrelenting pressure of the Allahabad High Court lawyers. This is just not done and is just not acceptable. Even the incumbent President of Meerut Bar – Mr KP Sharma laments with a heavy heart that West UP accounts for the maximum number of pending cases in any part of the country and owes also for more than half of the total number of pending cases of Uttar Pradesh and still has not even a single Bench in any of the districts!

It must be asked: Why this Bench issue in West UP has been hanging fire since last 77 years is most mind-numbing and is totally incomprehensible? The point really is: Denial of even a single Bench to West UP is antithetical to the very concept of speedy justice and justice at doorsteps. It is a stark reminder of how much injustice has been perpetrated so chillingly, callously and continuously by not allowing even a single High Court Bench in any of the districts of West UP in last 77 years!

It is the bounden duty of the Apex Court to take suo motu cognizance of it and direct appropriate action of creating a High Court Bench in any of the districts of West UP! The last bastion and ray of hope for the more than 10 crore people of West UP is the Supreme Court which is the topmost court of India and which must take suo motu cognizance of the most compelling and most legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP as it is empowered also under Article 142 of the Constitution to do so and as it has done also in so many other far less pressing cases!

Nothing on earth can be more unfortunate than this irrefutable fact that even as India is celebrating its 75th National Republic Day, we see that Uttar Pradesh which has maximum population more than 25 crores and so also has maximum MPs both in Lok Sabha and in Rajya Sabha and so also has maximum MLAs among all the States and so also has maximum villages more than one lakh and so also has maximum number of pending cases in High Court more than 10 lakh cases and here too more than half of the pending cases are from West UP and so also has maximum pending cases in lower courts about to touch nearly one crore and so also has maximum number of Judges in all courts both in lower and in High Courts and has maximum members in State Bar Council that is the maximum in the world and still has just one High Court Bench and that too so close to Allahabad at Lucknow established in 1948 more than 76 years ago where it was just not needed at all and nowhere else!

Many term Allahabad High Court as the biggest High Court in the world still why it has just one Bench only and why so many smaller States like Karnataka whose population is about 4 crore less than UP at 6 crore we see two High Court Bench created in one go by Centre in 2012 at Dharwad and Gulbarga for just 4 and 8 districts only but not a single for 30 districts of West UP with population of more than 10 crores for which even Justice Jaswant Singh Commission in mid 1980s recommended High Court Bench yet not one created and Maharashtra which already had multiple High Court Benches was given one more as recommended at Aurangabad but for UP for which 3 Benches were created not a single was allowed to come up! These bone chilling facts just cannot be swept inside the carpet! It was in CJI Dr DY Chandrachud’s term as Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court in 2014-15 that lawyers of West UP went on 6 months strike yet we saw that no action was taken on creating Bench even though it is a dire necessity! Why?

It has been more than 14 years since the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India was submitted prepared under the Chairmanship of eminent former Supreme Court Judge Dr AR Lakshmanan but still it has not been most unfortunately implemented in big States like UP, Bihar and Rajasthan. Why the landmark recommendations of Justice Jaswant Singh Commission set up by Centre itself under the Chairmanship of former Supreme Court Judge - Jaswant Singh was implemented most fraudulently by not approving even a single High Court Bench for undivided Uttar Pradesh for whom it recommended maximum three Benches at Agra, Dehradun and Nainital due to which people of hilly areas had to travel thousands of kilometers all the way to Allahabad most cruelly while most partially approving just one Bench recommended for Maharashtra at Aurangabad created most promptly in early 1980s which already had multiple High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji and so also at West Bengal in Jalpaiguri for just 6 districts which already had Bench at Port Blair for just 2 lakhs people and so also a Bench approved at Madurai in Tamil Nadu but West UP whose population is more than most of the States in India including Tamil Nadu at 10 crores was not given even a single Bench? This was the real reason why the people of hilly regions of undivided UP agitated for separate Statehood and ultimately Uttarakhand created in 2000 and for which not one Bench was conceded then for same Nainital we saw Centre conceding a separate High Court!

The billion dollar question is: Is this is what Centre wants to happen in UP also? By the way, Sanjeev Kumar Baliyan who is Union Minister recently in a Jat Summit in Meerut promised separate High Court and separate Statehood! What is Centre upto? Does it want huge agitations for separate Statehood in West UP? Can’t it approve even a single Bench for West UP?

It must also be asked: Why has Bench remained elusive for West UP for such a long time? Why is Centre demonstrating so much of obduracy in addressing it? Why West UP which owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP has no High Court Bench? What is the point in denying West UP even a single Bench when it owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP and High Court at Allahabad is so far about 700 km on average for which Justice Jaswant Singh Commission also recommended strongly a Bench? What keeps on running in my mind most of the time is: Why is Centre so hell bent in denying West UP even a single Bench due to which the lawyers of West UP had gone on total strike on January 18, 2024? For 6 months in 2001 and in 2014 the lawyers of West UP had gone on 6 months strike for Bench and for two to three months also many times and one month hunger strike in 1976 and strike from May 1981 to February 2024 every Saturday to register strongest protest and many times even on Wednesday which was discontinued so that litigants don’t suffer hugely!

It is definitely most deeply disappointing to see that even after more than 77 years of independence we still see that no party ruling in Centre has ever cared for the endless woes of the litigants of West UP which they have been facing by being made to travel whole night and half day all the way to Allahabad averaging 700 to 800 km due to the most despicable, dastardly and derisive stand of Centre to not allow even a single High Court Bench in whole of West UP or even in whole of UP even though former Mumbai Commissioner of Police and former Union Cabinet Minister in PM Narendra Modi’s regime Dr Satyapal Singh very strongly pitched his voice right inside Parliament a few years back in support of two High Court Benches for West UP at Meerut and Agra and in addition also demanded High Court Bench in Varanasi, Gorakhpur and Jhansi! As if this was not enough, former PM late Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee himself demanded High Court Bench for West UP at Meerut in 1986 as Opposition Leader in Parliament and so also many UP CM in past having recommended Bench with Sampoornand having recommended it in 1955 and with Mayawati recommending creation of West UP as a separate State in 1995 and still till now in January 2024, we see no High Court Bench set up anywhere not just in West UP but in whole of UP except the one at Lucknow where it was just not needed at all created way back in 1948 so near to Allahabad where High Court is located! Centre’s firm determination to help the poorest of the poor litigants can come to fruition only by the creation of more High Court Bench in needy regions like West UP, Purvanchal and Bundelkhand!

All that I am saying and submitting is that why can’t West UP have even a single Bench? Centre has no business to keep denying West UP a single Bench on one pretext or the other! Why the hell on earth such blatant, brazen, brutal and blind disrespect of Constitution has been allowed to fester, flourish and linger inordinately for such a long time?

Let me put it this way: Why does it not matter to Centre that the litigants of West UP have to travel so far to Allahabad which averages more than 700 km and the population of West UP is nearly half of UP at more than 10 crores and owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP and still not even one Bench? Why does it not matter to Centre that lawyers of West UP have been agitating and striking and doing not what not for a Bench yet after 77 years no Bench? Why does it not matter to Centre that even Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge recommended Bench for West UP yet after so many decades no Bench?

It must be asked: Why is Centre mutilating Article 14 of Constitution by denying West UP even a single Bench and equipping Eastern UP alone with both High Court and a Bench? Why Maharashtra tops in latest Justice Index Ranking States list and still has maximum Benches and UP even though figuring in bottom and owing for maximum cases still one Bench only in Lucknow in Eastern UP which already had High Court at Allahabad since last more than two centuries? Why West UP owing for more than half of the total pending cases has no Bench? This is definitely nothing else but is a sheer subversion of the Constitution itself and what it stands for!

At this juncture, it would be material to note that justice and truth can be ensured only if there is a level playing field. What we see in case of distribution of High Court Benches in different States most unequally and most disgracefully is by Centre favouring few elite States like Maharashtra, Assam, Karnataka, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh to have multiple High Court Benches leaving out big States like UP, Rajasthan and Bihar to suffer most unjustly with just one or no Bench which makes a complete mockery of the very concept of justice, truth and equality as enshrined in Constitution and is definitely the biggest disrespect to it! Why Centre forgets that:
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere? Centre must refrain from higgledy-piggledy approach on such a serious issue as this as most unfortunately we have been witnessing since last 75 years of India becoming a Republic country!

All told, nation must definitely know that what are the inexplicable reasons due to which West UP has been treated so contemptuously since last nearly 8 decades and so also lawless Bihar which has not even a single Bench! Centre’s most shoddy handling in tackling this Bench issue cannot be ever brushed aside lightly! Centre may be facing unrelenting pressure from the powerful lobby deadly opposed to a Bench in West UP and so also State Government but throwing the baby out with the bathwater is hardly a sensible decision and both Centre and State Government definitely cannot be applauded for doing just nothing to address it! It merits prompt redressal! Most distressingly, why even Supreme Court has maintained a conspicuous deafening silence on it for nearly 80 years? Will it act after 100 years? Supreme Court and Centre have a lot of explaining to do on this! CJI must act!

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