The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has taken a strong stance against the boycott of judicial work and a lawyers' strike. On Monday, the vacation bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajiv Bharti issued notices to office-bearers of the Central Bar Association and the Lucknow Bar Association, along with three advocates in their individual capacity. The bench demanded explanations as to why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated and why a complaint regarding their conduct should not be forwarded to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh.
Background of the Case
The order was passed during the hearing of a petition filed by Anuradha Singh and others. This petition was linked to earlier court directions for the removal of encroachments by lawyers and others in and around the old High Court premises at Kaiserbagh. Following the initiation of an anti-encroachment drive by police, district administration, and municipal authorities, sections of the legal fraternity opposed the action and abstained from judicial work.
Court's Observations
The court had earlier sought a report from the District Judge of Lucknow on the developments. In its Monday order, the bench noted that advocates abstained from work between May 18 and May 26, following calls by the two bar associations. The bench observed that this boycott violated directions issued by the Supreme Court and the High Court, calling it prima facie illegal and unjustified.
The court also recorded that the strike adversely affected litigants, including poor litigants who traveled from distant places, and caused inconvenience to witnesses and other stakeholders. It reiterated that neither individual advocates nor bar associations have any right to call for court boycotts or strikes.
Evidence and Notices
During the hearing, the bench examined the District Judge's report and video footage. The material reportedly showed an advocate distributing plastic batons during a meeting and making provocative remarks against the administration and police. The court treated this as a serious incident.
Notices were issued to advocates Uttam Tripathi, Himanshu Mishra, and Brijesh Kumar Yadav, directing them to file replies on affidavit within two weeks. The court also noted that the Central Bar Association had expelled two advocates from its membership for five years as disciplinary action.
The matter is listed for further hearing on July 27.
