Allahabad HC Bar-Bench: Justice Deshwal Removal Sought by Bar

• The Allahabad High Court Bar Association has requested the Awadh Bar Association to intervene and prevent Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal from hearing cases.
• This request stems from two orders issued by Justice Deshwal on October 28 and 29, which the HCBA claims were against the advocate community and attempted to create divisions.
• The broader Bar-Bench confrontation began on October 27 with an incident in Justice Ajay Bhanot's courtroom involving a seating dispute and alleged judicial misconduct.
• Lawyers subsequently protested, leading to disruptions in Justice Bhanot's courtroom and Justice Deshwal documenting his disapproval of the unrest in his orders.
• The HCBA's appeal highlights concerns over the dignity and interests of advocates amidst escalating tensions within the Allahabad High Court.

The ongoing Bar-Bench confrontation, particularly the Allahabad High Court Bar Association's call for the Awadh Bar Association to intervene against Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, underscores significant challenges within the Allahabad High Court jurisdiction.

The Allahabad High Court Bar Association (HCBA) has formally requested the Awadh Bar Association, based in Lucknow, to intervene and ensure that Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal is prevented from presiding over judicial proceedings. This appeal, made in a letter dated October 31, follows two specific orders issued by Justice Deshwal on October 28 and 29, which the HCBA contends were directly detrimental to the advocate community and damaged its professional standing. The communication was addressed to the newly elected office-bearers of the Awadh Bar Association, including its chairman, president, and general secretary.

The HCBA's representation, signed by newly elected president Senior Advocate Dr C.P. Upadhyay and general secretary Santosh Kumar Mishra, specifically cited orders in the cases of *Devendra Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh* (Bail Application No. 32917 of 2026) and *Ankit Singh alias Anant Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh* (Bail Application No. 36572 of 2026). The association alleged that Justice Deshwal, through his observations in these orders, deliberately attempted to sow discord among advocates. The letter explicitly stated, "In the order dated 29.10.2026, the Hon'ble Judge made every possible effort to create differences among us advocates, which is highly condemnable." This confrontation has already led to advocates protesting the two orders, resulting in Justice Deshwal being unable to hold court on both affected days. The HCBA urged the Awadh Bar Association to take necessary measures to safeguard the interests and dignity of advocates by ensuring Justice Deshwal's removal from judicial duties.

The current request for Awadh Bar Association intervention is the latest development in an escalating confrontation between the Bar and Bench at the Allahabad High Court, which originated from an incident on October 27. The initial dispute occurred in the courtroom of Justice Ajay Bhanot, specifically in Court No. 49, concerning the seating arrangement of a police officer. A Superintendent of Police was reportedly occupying a seat behind the Additional Government Advocate when an advocate raised an objection. The Additional Government Advocate then allegedly complained to Justice Bhanot upon his entry into the courtroom.

According to the Allahabad High Court Bar Association, Justice Bhanot subsequently reprimanded the objecting advocate, issued a threat of imprisonment, and instructed the advocate to apologize to the police officer. Furthermore, the association claimed that Justice Bhanot made disparaging remarks directed at Senior Advocate V.P. Srivastava, who was present during the proceedings. In response to this alleged conduct, the HCBA sought the Chief Justice's intervention and issued a warning that its members would boycott Justice Bhanot's courtroom if appropriate action was not taken. The situation further intensified on October 28 when a group of lawyers allegedly disrupted proceedings in Justice Bhanot's courtroom by raising slogans, with visuals emerging of chairs being thrown and furniture overturned. Justice Deshwal, in turn, documented his strong disapproval of the disruptions caused by advocates outside his courtroom within his orders, directly linking his judicial actions to the ongoing unrest.

The ongoing Bar-Bench confrontation, particularly the Allahabad High Court Bar Association's call for the Awadh Bar Association to intervene against Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, underscores significant challenges within the Allahabad High Court jurisdiction. Such disputes, stemming from perceived judicial overreach or disrespect towards the advocate community, can have profound effects on the stability and efficiency of Allahabad High Court judicial proceedings. The HCBA's insistence on protecting the dignity and interests of advocates highlights a fundamental tension that, if unresolved, could lead to further disruptions and erode trust between the judiciary and the legal profession.

The request for Justice Deshwal to be restrained from judicial proceedings, based on allegations of attempting to create divisions among lawyers and tarnishing their image, signals a serious breakdown in the working relationship. For lawyers practicing within this jurisdiction, awareness of this ongoing conflict is crucial, as it may influence judicial temperament, affect the handling of cases, and potentially impact the strategic planning of legal matters, especially those involving advocate conduct or bar-bench relations. The sustained nature of this confrontation suggests a need for resolution to ensure the smooth functioning of justice within the Allahabad High Court.

Lawyers practicing in the Allahabad High Court jurisdiction should be aware of the ongoing Bar-Bench confrontation, as it may lead to disruptions in court proceedings, influence judicial temperament, and potentially affect the handling of cases, particularly those involving advocate conduct or bar-bench relations. Monitoring developments in this conflict is crucial for strategic planning and client advice.

Source: Original reporting via Bar and Bench