Advocate’s chamber razed in Ghaziabad court, 4 booked

The FIR names three individuals identified as lawyers and an unidentified driver of the earthmoving machine.

A group of individuals allegedly brought in an earthmoving machine and demolished an advocate’s chamber at the Ghaziabad civil court complex early on Friday morning, police said on Saturday.

According to the complaint, the demolished chamber was located in E Block of the civil court. (HT Photo)

The incident took place around 4am and was caught on CCTV, according to officials. Based on a complaint filed by the affected lawyer, an FIR has been registered at Kavi Nagar police station under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including sections 331(4) (house-trespass or house-breaking by night), 305 (theft in dwelling), 324(4) (mischief causing loss of damages), and 326(f) (causing damage to property).

The FIR names three individuals identified as lawyers and an unidentified driver of the earthmoving machine. “There was some dispute related to the chamber between two groups of lawyers. Around 4am on March 4, the second group allegedly brought in an earthmoving machine and demolished the chamber. CCTV footage has emerged, and we have registered an FIR on a complaint given by the affected party. Investigation is on in the case,” said Rajesh Kumar, DCP (City Zone).

According to the complaint, the demolished chamber was located in E Block of the civil court. Police said the structure was situated on the road connecting the main court complex to the district police office. Notably, police security is stationed inside the court complex, not in its outer periphery, the DCP clarified.

The CCTV footage reportedly shows an earthmover clearing rubble from what appears to be a recently demolished structure. However, HT could not independently verify the authenticity of the footage.

According to police, the FIR was registered nearly 19 hours after the footage surfaced, at 11.30pm on April 4. HT attempted to reach out to Deepak Sharma, president of the Bar Association, for comment on the alleged intra-lawyer dispute but did not receive any response.