The Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has initiated proceedings against 16 lawyers accused of attempting to manipulate bench assignments in a high-profile case pending before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Council’s Privilege Committee is also expected to seek explanations from Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi over their appearances in the same matter, where allegations of “bench hunting” have surfaced.
While notices have already been issued to 16 advocates, the Committee is now considering whether Singhvi and Rohatgi—who are not enrolled with the Bar Council in Chandigarh—should also be formally called to explain their role. “How am I concerned? It’s all rubbish. I have got no such notice,” Rohatgi said when approached for comment. Singhvi could not be reached.
Background of the Case
The controversy revolves around a criminal case involving bribery allegations against a judicial officer. A businessman, named as a co-accused, had filed a quashing petition in the matter. Multiple senior lawyers—Singhvi, Rohatgi, Puneet Bali, and Rakesh Nehra—have appeared for him at various stages, although more recently, only Singhvi and Bali have continued to represent the petitioner.
The case attracted wide attention in May this year after Chief Justice Sheel Nagu removed it from the board of Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu, who had already reserved judgment. Citing complaints received, Chief Justice Nagu de-listed the matter and began hearing it himself. However, he later recused himself, noting that he had already dealt with it administratively. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi also recused from hearing the case.
It was during one of the hearings in May that Chief Justice Nagu hinted at bench hunting. He remarked that a particular lawyer appeared to have been added merely as the filing counsel to get the matter de-listed from a specific judge.
Committee Proceedings and Statements
Following these developments, the Chairman of the Bar Council directed the Privilege Committee to take up the issue immediately and conduct proceedings on a day-to-day basis. The Committee has summoned 16 lawyers to appear on August 16—either in person or through legal representatives—to explain their conduct.
A notice issued to the advocates stated, “The documents placed before us are prima facie pointing towards the attempt to manipulate the Bench Assignment process of the Hon’ble High Court. The sole objective of placing this matter, suo moto, before the Committee is to uphold the dignity of the legal profession, ensure the maintenance of legal ethics, and discharge the responsibilities entrusted under the law.”
The Committee also remarked that it found it “very painful and disturbing” to note how “tactfully, systematically and in an organized manner, some of the advocates made efforts to hunt the Bench.” The role of advocate JK Singla, who filed the petition, was particularly highlighted. The Committee hinted at possible involvement of other senior advocates working “behind the curtains.”
Advocates Asked to Respond
In addition to Bali and Nehra, the other lawyers who have been issued notices include:
- JK Singla
- Sidharth Bhardwaj
- Aditya Aggarwal
- Gagandeep Singh
- Anmol Chandan
- Baljeet Beniwal
- Harsh Sharma
- Sauhard Singh
- Rupender Singh
- Ankit Yadav
- Ashim Singla
- Aakash Sharma
- Bindu
- APS Shergil
The Committee believes that obtaining responses from Singhvi and Rohatgi is necessary for a full and fair adjudication of the issue. Whether they will be formally summoned remains to be seen.
