E-Paper
Vandalism in court: Allahabad HC orders contempt action against group of lawyers
In its October 29 order, a division bench also requests chief justice to ensure that FIR is registered against the concerned lawyers
Prefer HTon Google
The Allahabad high court has ordered criminal contempt proceedings against a group of lawyers involved in ruckus inside a courtroom (no. 49) on October 28.
In its October 29 order, a division bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant also requested the chief justice to ensure that FIR is registered against the concerned lawyers for incitement to violence, conspiracy to commit violence, perpetration of violence and vandalism in the court.
Further, an FIR may be registered against those who made false posts on social media pertaining to the aforesaid incident in the high court and ensure that false posts on social media platforms pertaining to the incident are blocked and deleted, observed the bench in its order made public on November 2.
The bench called for action against the advocates involved in physically assaulting state law officers, damaging courtroom property, attacking security personnel and executing a campaign of social media disinformation.
As per the order, the crisis unfolded on October 28 morning when an aggressive mob of lawyers disrupted proceedings by shouting slogans, forcing the court to rise. Moments earlier, senior advocate VP Srivastava had informed the bench that a circular issued on October 27 by newly elected Bar Association office-bearers—alleging he was humiliated by the court—was entirely false and groundless.
Immediately after the judges retired to chambers, the situation escalated into mob violence. Additional government advocate (AGA-I) Paritosh Kumar Malviya fled to the judges’ chambers in a severely injured condition seeking refuge after being beaten inside the courtroom by lawyers targeting him for defending the state government.
Other state counsel, bench secretaries and court staff were also physically assaulted. The bench noted that the removal of courtroom chairs prior to 10:00 am evidenced a pre-planned incident.
The bench traced the genesis of the uproar to a misleading letter issued by president-elect Dr CP Upadhyay and general secretary-elect Santosh Kumar Mishra of the High Court Bar Association. The letter falsely claimed that a lawyer had been ordered to be jailed and was forced to apologise to a police officer.
Refuting these claims, Justice Bhanot clarified that no jail order was ever passed or recorded. The lawyer had voluntarily apologised after misbehaving with a senior police official attending court with case records.
Addressing the aftermath, the high court slammed a torrent of online disinformation, remarking that social media had operated as a “Goebbelsian institution” where truth became the first casualty.
The bench observed that while constructive criticism elevates justice, free speech cannot serve as a licence for personal abuse, violence, or intimidation. Expressing deep concern over the “criminalization of the Bar,” the court emphasised that gang-like tactics tear at the foundations of the judiciary.
