Allahabad High Court: Lawyers Protest Justice Ajay Bhanot, Throw Furniture

• Lawyers at the Allahabad High Court staged a chaotic protest in Justice Ajay Bhanot's courtroom on Wednesday, reportedly throwing furniture.
• The protest followed a boycott threat by the Allahabad High Court Bar Association over alleged misbehavior by Justice Bhanot.
• The Bar Association claimed Justice Bhanot made a lawyer apologize to a police officer for a seating dispute and threatened the lawyer with jail.
• Allegations also include Justice Bhanot ridiculing a senior counsel.
• The Bar Association had urged the Chief Justice to address the alleged ill-treatment, warning of a boycott if no action was taken.

This volatile situation developed just one day after the Allahabad High Court Bar Association had issued a stern warning regarding a potential boycott of Justice Bhanot's court.

Disorderly scenes unfolded within the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday, as advocates staged a protest that reportedly escalated into chaos inside Justice Ajay Bhanot's courtroom. The demonstration, which occurred while Justice Bhanot was presiding alongside Justice Divesh Chandra Samant, saw lawyers raising slogans and allegedly hurling furniture and other objects around the judicial chamber. Videos circulating from the High Court on Wednesday depicted numerous advocates gathering outside the courtroom where the events transpired.

Reports also surfaced claiming that a shoe was thrown in the direction of Justice Bhanot during the commotion. However, this specific allegation could not be independently verified by the reporting agency. This volatile situation developed just one day after the Allahabad High Court Bar Association had issued a stern warning regarding a potential boycott of Justice Bhanot's court.

The unrest stemmed from serious allegations of purported impropriety leveled against Justice Ajay Bhanot by the Allahabad High Court Bar Association. On Tuesday, the Bar Association claimed that Justice Bhanot had compelled a lawyer to issue an apology to a Superintendent of Police (SP). This incident reportedly occurred after the lawyer objected to the SP occupying a seating area typically reserved for legal practitioners within the courtroom.

According to the Bar Association, a dedicated chair was being provided for police officers and other high-ranking officials in Justice Bhanot's courtroom, prompting the lawyer to request the SP to move to a different location. Further accusations by the bar body included claims that the judge issued a threat of incarceration against the lawyer involved in the seating dispute and also reportedly disparaged another senior advocate. These alleged instances of judicial misconduct India formed the basis for the advocates protest Uttar Pradesh.

In response to these grave allegations, the Allahabad High Court Bar Association had formally appealed to the Chief Justice, urging an immediate intervention and cognizance of the alleged ill-treatment of its member. The association had explicitly warned that its members would initiate a Justice Ajay Bhanot boycott if no decisive action was taken to address their grievances. The subsequent events, including lawyers throw furniture courtroom, underscore the deep-seated tensions between the bench and the bar.

This incident highlights a critical juncture for the judiciary in Uttar Pradesh, as the relationship between judges and legal practitioners is fundamental to the functioning of justice. The Bar Association's firm stance and the ensuing protest signal a significant challenge to judicial decorum and the established protocols within the High Court, demanding a careful and considered response from the Chief Justice to prevent further disruptions to legal proceedings.

Lawyers practicing in the Allahabad High Court, particularly before Justice Ajay Bhanot, should be aware of the severe and ongoing tensions between the bar and the bench, which could lead to disruptions in court proceedings, potential boycotts, and an uncertain environment for litigation. This incident highlights the importance of monitoring the Chief Justice's response and any subsequent actions by the Bar Association regarding judicial conduct and professional decorum.

Source: Original reporting via Bar & Bench