On Tuesday, the Allahabad High Court stepped in to address allegations of violence and intimidation inside the Lucknow District Court after three advocates, including two women lawyers, claimed they were assaulted and prevented from representing their client in a civil dispute. Taking serious note of the allegations, the Court also examined whether such incidents amounted to interference with the administration of justice, while directing the authorities to immediately report on the episode and ensure the safety of the affected advocates.
The controversy began when three advocates approached the High Court alleging that they were prevented from filing their vakalatnama and appearing in a civil suit before the Lucknow District Court by certain members of the local Bar. According to the application, they, along with their client, were physically assaulted and threatened for taking up the case. The advocates claimed that their client was beaten while they themselves were abused and attacked when they attempted to intervene.
During the hearing, the Bench was informed that the dispute arose out of a pending civil suit seeking declaration of title and injunction over a disputed property. The Court was also shown a video, which the applicants claimed captured the assault on their client.
The Division Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla observed that, if the allegations were true, the incident was of grave concern as it involved not merely the commission of offences but also an attack on the judicial process itself. Noting that such occurrences had surfaced earlier as well, the Bench remarked, “The matter not only involves commission of an offence by the alleged persons but also of interference in the dispensation of justice.”
The Court directed the District Judge, Lucknow, to submit a report along with CCTV footage, sought a report from the Commissioner of Police regarding the incident and the antecedents of the persons allegedly involved, and ordered that the three advocate-applicants be provided adequate police security for the duration of their stay in Lucknow and while appearing before the High Court.
Case Title: Anil Kumar Khanna vs. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and others
Case No.: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. – 8810 of 2023
Coram: Hon’ble Rajan Roy, Hon’ble Manjive Shukla,
Advocate for the Petitioner: Ad. Aadesh Pandey, Adv. Aakash Rai, Adv. Aishwarya Mishra, Adv. Aishwarya Pratap Singh, Adv. Ajitanshu Tripathi, Adv. Akshaya Katiyar, Adv. Amol Kumar Srivastava, Adv. Anand Kumar Sharma, Adv. Anil Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Animesh Upadhyay,
Advocate for the Respondent: A.G.A., A.S.G.I., Adv. Aasif Razzaque Khan, Adv. Ajey Singh, Adv. Alok Kumar Singh, Adv. Amit Jaiswal Ojus Law,Adv. Amol Kumar Srivastava, Adv. Amrendra Nath Tripathi, Adv. Anil Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ankit Kumar Pandey,
