Allahabad High Court slams lawyers for ‘illegal’ strike in May: ‘Created chaos, hurt litigants’
The Lucknow Bench observed that the boycott in May violated Supreme Court guidelines and issued notices to Bar Associations and three advocates.
Police had resorted to mild force to disperse the protesters. (Express Photo by Vishal Srivastav) Taking serious note of advocates going on strike and provoking the community to indulge in violence, the Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow bench has issued notices to the Central Bar Association, Lucknow, Lucknow Bar Association, and three advocates.
The advocates were on strike from May 18 to 26, protesting against the removal of illegal encroachments around the Lucknow district court premises. The action was taken by the municipal corporation following a March 11 HC order.
The bench said the advocates indulged in illegal and unauthorised activities, created chaos and disturbance in the court premises, and abstained from judicial work during the strike.
Police had resorted to mild force to disperse the protesters. (Express Photo by Vishal Srivastav).
A division bench of Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Rajeev Bharti, while hearing a criminal writ PIL on Monday, issued notices to the office bearers of both Bar Associations and the advocates to show cause as to why criminal contempt proceedings may not be initiated against them and why their misconduct may not be referred to the Bar Council of UP for action.
The report submitted by the municipal corporation before the court stated that out of a total of 72 marked illegal encroachments, only 14 were removed on May 17. The rest could not be cleared due to obstructions and hindrances created by the advocates, it said.
As noted in the court order, the District Judge, through a letter dated May 18, informed the Registrar General of the High Court that the Central Bar Association, Lucknow, and the Lucknow Bar Association had resolved to abstain from work from May 18 to 20.
The District Judge also submitted a report along with a pen drive containing photos and videos of the strike and meetings of Bar Association members. One video reportedly showed an advocate distributing plastic batons, commonly used by police or PAC personnel. The court took the report on record.
Contrary to SC directions
In its order, the bench of Justices Chauhan and Bharti stated that the advocates abstained from judicial work from May 18-26 on the call of office bearers of the two bar Associations, causing serious prejudice to litigants. It observed that many litigants were poor and suffered financial loss due to travel and delays.
The court further stated that strikes or boycotts by the Lawyers’ Association are contrary to Supreme Court directions, and such conduct is unjustified and illegal. The SC had said the right to strike cannot be justified under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, as it affects the rights of others, particularly the right to speedy justice under Articles 14 and 21, the court observed in the order.
The bench observed that despite clear Supreme Court directions, advocates proceeded with the strike and boycott. It also noted allegations that plastic batons were distributed during a meeting in the presence of office bearers, accompanied by slogans that advocates shall now handle the administration using these lathis.
The bench stated in the order, “We hereby treat the aforesaid strike/ boycott of judicial work… as unjustified and illegal and consequential orders to that effect would be issued subsequently.”
Notices issued
The court was informed that the general secretary of the Central Bar Association, Lucknow, had issued show-cause notices on May 21 to the three advocates. Notices were issued to Uttam Tripathi who allegedly distributed plastic lathis; Himanshu Mishra, who allegedly made provocative speeches on social media; and Brijesh Kumar Yadav, who allegedly made irresponsible comments about the Administrative Judge, allegedly creating unrest among advocates.
Illegal encroachments around the Lucknow district court premises were removed in May. (Express Photo by Vishal Srivastav)
The Bar Association also issued expulsion letters dated June 4 against Tripathi and Yadav, expelling them for five years from primary membership of the association considering their explanation.
Listing the case for further hearing for July 27, the bench directed the advocates to submit their explanation within two weeks, supported with an affidavit giving an undertaking that they shall follow the dictums of the apex court referred to in the order and maintain good conduct and behaviour in the interest of institution.
The bench added, “It is needless to say that any appropriate order would be passed after considering the explanation and undertaking of the aforesaid advocates.”
Share
