The Allahabad High Court has raised objections to lawyers allegedly obstructing access to a courtroom and preventing court staff from entering during protests against Justice Ajay Bhanot. The court recorded that the disruption had interfered with judicial proceedings and forced staff members to use the entrance reserved for judges.
A Division Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant, in an order dated November 4, observed that judicial work could not remain suspended merely because lawyers had deliberately stayed away from their duties.
The Bench noted that a large gathering of advocates outside the courtroom had created noise that disrupted proceedings. It further recorded that lawyers had blocked the main entrance, preventing court employees from entering.
Consequently, the court instructed its staff to access the courtroom through the judges’ entrance.
Court Seeks Explanation for Absence of Government Lawyers
The observations were recorded while the Bench was considering a criminal writ petition filed by Farrukhabad resident Salman Akhtar challenging an FIR against the applicants.
The FIR involved allegations including sexual relations on a false promise of marriage, criminal intimidation and rioting.
When the matter was taken up on the revised call, neither the petitioners’ advocates nor the additional government advocates (AGAs) appeared before the court. The Bench noted that the petitioners’ lawyers were listed in the cause list but nobody appeared to pursue the petition.
Taking exception to the absence of the AGAs, the court directed the government advocate to submit a report explaining why they had not attended the proceedings.
Protests Follow Allegations Against Justice Bhanot
The disruption occurred amid protests arising from an October 27 incident in Court No. 49, where Justice Bhanot was presiding over a Division Bench.
On October 28, the Allahabad High Court Bar Association (HCBA) sent a letter to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali alleging that Justice Bhanot had humiliated an advocate during court proceedings.
According to the Association, the dispute began when an advocate objected to a police officer occupying a particular seat inside the courtroom. The HCBA alleged that Justice Bhanot subsequently directed that the lawyer be sent to jail and required him to apologise to the police officer.
The Association warned that advocates would boycott Justice Bhanot’s court unless appropriate action was taken.
Protests followed the controversy, during which some lawyers allegedly damaged furniture inside the judge’s courtroom.
Earlier Order Found Prima Facie Criminal Contempt
The November 4 observations came after another order passed by the same Division Bench on November 2 concerning incidents of violence and vandalism involving lawyers.
In that order, Justices Bhanot and Samant held that the alleged assault on state law officers, court employees and security personnel, along with damage to courtroom property, prima facie amounted to criminal contempt.
The Bench also requested the Chief Justice to consider directing the registration of FIRs against the lawyers allegedly involved in the incidents.
It further sought consideration of criminal action against individuals accused of circulating false social media posts concerning the events.
