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.

» Home
Thursday, July 4, 2024

Why Can’t West UP Have Five Or Six High Court Benches?

Posted in: Judiciary
Tue, May 28, 24, 10:53, 1 Month ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 18374
It is most shocking that UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population – more than 25 crore as CM Yogi Adityanath always proudly claims

One set of citizens cannot prosper at the cost of another set of citizens, for that would not be fair or unreasonable. - Ex CJI Mr Jagdish Singh Khehar

It is most shocking that UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population – more than 25 crore as CM Yogi Adityanath always proudly claims, 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% and now after so many decades the percentage of pending cases in West UP has gone substantially much higher, maximum cases in lower courts about to touch 1 crore, maximum Judges both in High Court – 160 and also in lower courts, maximum vacancies of Judges both in High Court and also 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 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 maximum undertrials in all age groups what not yet Centre till now middle of 2024 in June from July 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 26 districts yet no bench but Lucknow with just 62,363 square km and 12 districts has a bench! Allahabad High Court is biggest High Court in whole of Asia as was claimed by Yogi Adityanath and also is one of oldest High Court and UP Bar Council has maximum members yet has least Bench just one and so very near to Allahabad which is nothing but most senseless, shameless and stupid decision perpetuated since independence and not rectified till now!

It must be asked: Why is it that the people of West UP of more than 30 districts foolishly were compelled and are still compelled most senselessly, most shamelessly and most stupidly to travel all the way to Allahabad which is far away even from Lucknow where High Court Bench is located and averages 600 to 700 km on an average but the people of Nawab City i.e. Lucknow cannot travel even 200 km away to Allahabad? Most shamefully, why no one cares for poorest of poor, women and infirm and physically handicapped people who can’t travel so far easily and Centre is most happy by inaugurating an international airport at Kushinagar and now again at Jewar in West UP which is a very good thing but why so miserly on High Court Bench for West UP which will benefit all whether poor or rich or Hindu or Muslim or of any other religion? Centre must act now and not just keep on advancing one lame excuse or the other as a pretext for not creating a High Bench anywhere in UP other than at Lucknow where it was just not needed at all as it is so close to Allahabad and worst still the 30 districts of West UP were not attached even with Lucknow which falls 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad which means more than 700 km on average all the way to Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest injustice!

It must definitely be asked: When Centre in 2008 can create two High Court Benches for Karnataka which has just 6 crore population for just 4 and 8 districts only at Dharwad and Gulbarga respectively then why for 30 districts with 10 crore population West UP cannot have five or six High Court Benches as maximum number of pending cases are from West UP? Why litigants of West UP have to travel whole night and half day all the way to Allahabad? Area of West UP is 98,933 square km and accounts for 33.61 percent of total area of UP and has 26 districts yet no bench but Lucknow with just 62,363 square km and 12 districts has a bench!

It merits just no reiteration that the position of UP must definitely be primus inter pares which means in plain language first among equals. This stands necessitated by the irrefutable fact that UP has maximum pending cases among all the States and here too West UP accounts for majority of the pending cases and still has not even a single High Court Bench! Why has Centre truly messed up all its good work by not approving even a single Bench for West UP in last 77 years?

It is a no-brainer that Eastern UP alone cannot be deemed to have an indefeasible right to have both High Court and High Court Bench and in other regions like Western UP or Bundelkhand or Purvanchal not allowing even a single Bench is most horrendous because this flawed approach is against the very core basis on which our Constitution rests upon. It cannot be dismissed lightly that none other than Dr BR Ambedkar who is considered as the key architect of the Constitution himself proposed the division of Uttar Pradesh into three States that is Western, Eastern and Central and still Centre most shamelessly, senselessly and stupidly is not ready to concede even a single High Court Bench of West UP leave alone creating five to six High Court Benches as ideally should be the case!

The most puzzling question is: Why only Eastern UP has both High Court and a single Bench and West UP, Purvanchal and Bundelkhand have not even a single Bench anywhere which is most shocking! Supreme Court and so also the CJI have definitely not covered themselves with glory anyway in last 75 years by stupidly leaving everything on Centre alone who has done just nothing on it! Supreme Court is final but it cannot be always infallible! It has grievously erred by not doing anything on this since last nearly 75 years! Let’s fervently hope that better sense prevails on it and it acts keeping in mind the larger interests of the litigants of West UP which owes for majority of cases of UP and still has not even a single 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?

It must be asked: Why Centre disregarded most commendable recommendation made by one of the most eminent jurist of India – Soli J Sorabjee who as Attorney General in 2001 had categorically recommended that:
Centre is empowered to create a high court bench in West UP without any recommendation from the Chief Justice or Chief Minister or anyone else in this regard? Why Centre even disregarded what former Chairman of Supreme Court Bar Association BN Krishnamani said that:
Only by the creation of a high court bench in any of the districts in West UP will the people living there get real justice?

By all accounts, 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 multiple High Court Benches 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.

Bluntly put: Why can’t Centre be more flexible on setting up of more High Court Benches in UP? This burning issue definitely cannot be kept in the backburner any longer! Centre must have some pity on the more than 10 crore people of West UP whose population is more than most of the States in India except UP, Bihar and Maharashtra! It is high time and Centre must ensure that at least five or six High Court Benches are created in West UP for which currently there is not even a single Bench even though Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge also recommended it in mid 1970s!

Of course, what plays upon my mind most is: Why Centre has always succumbed in front of the powerful vested lobby deadly opposed to the creation of even a single High Court Bench in West UP since last so many decades? The most vital question which crops up here is: Why can’t Centre be more flexible and accommodative in addressing the huge inconveniences faced singularly by the litigants of West UP since last more than 77 years? At first blush, one can make out easily as to which part of UP has maximum pending cases that is West UP and therefore it must have at least 5 or 6 High Court Benches but most astoundingly, it has not even a single High Court Bench even after more than 77 years of independence! Most disgusting!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

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