Skip to main content

Centre 'discriminating' UP, is refusing more high court benches. Will CJI-designate act?

By Sanjeev Sirohi*
If more high court benches are created all over India, as was very recommended by the 230th report of the Law Commission of India, it will produce luminaries like the Chief Justice of India (CJI)-designate Sharad Arvind Bobde. It was the Nagpur High Court Bench which nurtured and groomed him as lawyer.
Bobde gave up his roaring practice to accept “judgeship”, and the rest is history. Would it have been possible if Nagpur had no high court bench? Without leaving his home and migrating anywhere else like in Mumbai, where the High Court is located, or at Aurangabad, where High Court Bench is also located, he could give his best and create a niche by becoming CJI designate, thus bringing glory not only to himself but also to Nagpur, where he practiced in high court bench for more than 22 years.
It is Maharashtra’s fortune that the Bombay High Court, which earlier had three high court benches at Nagpur, Kolhapur and Panaji, was accorded one more bench by the Centre in Kolhapur for just six districts in 2018. But it is India’s biggest misfortune that Uttar Pradesh (UP) has least -- which is incomprehensible.
Why no high court bench was created in UP even after the recommendations of Justice Jaswant Singh Commission, which was appointed by the then Indira Gandhi government in late 1970s? Justice Jaswant Singh recommended three high court benches for UP but not one was created, even though on its recommendations benches of high court were created at Aurangabad in Maharashtra, Madurai in Tamil Nadu and Jalpaiguri in West Bengal.
Uttar Pradesh is the biggest state amongst all the states in India with maximum population at more than 22 crore, which is more than even that of Pakistan. Here, UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and Prime Minister Narendra Modi keep bragging at public rallies time and again about India's development. It has maximum MPs in Lok Sabha (80), maximum MPs in Rajya Sabha (31), maximum MLAs in Vidhan Sabha (404), maximum MLAs in Vidhan Parishad (100).
It has maximum judges at lower courts at more than 5,000, maximum judges in High Courts at 160, but also maximum pending cases in lower courts at more than 50 lakh, maximum pending cases in the High Court at more than 10 lakh, maximum members in UP Bar Council, which is more than one lakh, the highest not just in India but in the whole world, as is pointed out in the website of the UP Bar Council.
The state has, in fact, maximum elected representatives at all levels, including villages, like sarpanches, maximum villages, which are again more than one lakh, maximum tehsils, maximum mayors, maximum districts (75) -- and also maximum poverty.
Yet it has just one high court bench, that too just about 200 km away from Allahabad, at Lucknow. Jawaharlal Nehru created it on July 1, 1948, 72 years ago. Ironically, while a high court was set up in Uttarakhand in 2000 for 13 districts, whose people earlier had to travel far away for more than 50 years after independence, none exists for West UP, which has 26 districts, and is notorious for lawlessness.
Who can deny that the Bar Council of UP has maximum members in the whole world, yet its former chairperson Darvesh Yadav just within three days of being elected was brutally murdered right inside court premises by pumping three bullets on her?
Justice Bobde
Who can deny that even Supreme Court lawyers are not safe in West UP, and this stands vindicated by the recent brutal murder of lady advocate Kuljeet Kaur in Noida in West UP right inside her house? Who can deny that many senior lawyers in the past also have been brutally murdered, not just in West UP, but in other parts also, as we saw in Basti?
Recently we saw a senior lawyer in Meerut Mukesh Sharma being brutally murdered just adjacent to his house while he had gone for walk. Another advocate Zahid was murdered in Baghpat. In Muzaffarnagar still another advocate Ameer Saifi was murdered. For how long will West UP's legitimate claim for a high court bench be consistently ignored?
UP must have maximum benches in India, and not minimum, as most unfortunately we have been seeing for the last 72 years
UP must have maximum benches in India, and not minimum, as most unfortunately we have been seeing for the last 72 years. The Centre's adamant approach to not create any bench anywhere else in UP other than Lucknow is responsible for the demand being raised for separate state, as we see in Bundelkhand, West UP, Poorvanchal and other parts.
The Centre can create two more benches for a peaceful state like Karnataka with just 6 crore people, at Dharwad and Gulbarga, for just four and eight districts, respectively, even though it had a bench already at Hubli. But for more than 9 crore people of West UP it is not ready to create even a single bench. Incidentally, Karnataka has just about 1 lakh pending cases, as against UP, which has more than 10 lakh pending cases, half of them from West UP!
The same is true of Assam and Maharashtra, which have 4 benches each, even though their pending cases stand nowhere compared to UP, whom Ban Ki Moon, former UN Secretary General, slammed as "rape and crime capital of India". West UP has more cases, more than both the states put together!
Is this is what Article 14, which talks about right to equality, stands for? Is the Centre not making an open mockery of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution? Are the people of West UP not entitled to get “speedy justice”, “justice at doorsteps” and “cheap justice” just like the people of Karnataka, Maharashtra, Assam etc.?
Why is it that the high court and benches of 8 states are closer to West UP as compared to Allahabad? Why even the Lahore High Court in Pakistan is closer to West UP as compared to the Allahabad High Court?
Former Attorney General Soli J Sorabjee said in 2001, while he was Attorney Geal, “The Centre is fully empowered to create a bench in any of the districts in West UP without any recommendation from the Chief Justice or anyone else in this regard.” Former Supreme Court Bar Association chairman Krishnamani also said, “Only by the creation of a high court bench in West UP will the people living here get real justice.”
CJI Ranjan Gogoi, while disposing of a petition on this filed by a lady advocate KL Chitra last year, also appreciated the dire need for a bench in West UP, but added, it is for the Centre to decide on it. One hopes that the new CJI would seriously look into it.
He must act as the Centre has failed to act in the last more than 72 years, especially in case of UP and Bihar, which in spite of being lawless states have just one bench and no bench respectively!
One hopes he will act on this score and do what none of his predecessors has dared but tended to play safe by leaving the ball in the Centre’s court, which has done just nothing at all, even though the incumbent Law Minister of India, Ravi Shankar Prasad, is from Bihar and the Prime Minister represents Varanasi in UP.
---
*Advocate, Meerut, UP

Comments

TRENDING

Hindutva founders 'borrowed' Nazi, fascist idea of one flag, one leader, one ideology

By Shamsul Islam*
With the unleashing of the reign of terror by the RSS/BJP rulers against working-class, peasant organizations, women organizations, student movements, intellectuals, writers, poets and progressive social/political activists, India also witnessed a series of resistance programmes organized by the pro-people cultural organizations in different parts of the country. My address in some of these programmes is reproduced here... 
***  Before sharing my views on the tasks of artists-writers-intellectuals in the times of fascism, let me briefly define fascism and how it is different from totalitarianism. Totalitarianism is political concept, a dictatorship of an individual, family or group which prohibits opposition in any form, and exercises an extremely high degree of control over public and private life. It is also described as authoritarianism.
Whereas fascism, while retaining all these repressive characteristics, also believes in god-ordained superiority of race, cultur…

Congress 'promises' cancellation of Adani power project: Jharkhand elections

Counterview Desk
Pointing out that people's issues take a backseat in Jharkhand's 2019 assembly elections, the state's civil rights organization, the Jharkhand Janadhikar Mahasabha, a coalition of activists and people’s organisations, has said that political parties have largely ignored in their electoral manifestos the need to implement the fifth schedule of the Constitution in a predominantly tribal district.

Gujarat refusal to observe Maulana Azad's birthday as Education Day 'discriminatory'

By Our Representative
The Gujarat government decision not to celebrate the National Education Day on !monday has gone controversial. Civil society organizations have particularly wondered whether the state government is shying away from the occasion, especially against the backdrop of "deteriorating" level of education in Gujarat.

Ex-World Bank chief economist doubts spurt in India's ease of doing business rank

By Rajiv Shah
This is in continuation of my previous blog where I had quoted from a commentary which top economist Prof Kaushik Basu had written in the New York Times (NYT) a little less than a month ago, on November 6, to be exact. He recalled this article through a tweet on November 29, soon after it was made known that India's growth rate had slumped (officially!) to 4.5%.

With RSS around, does India need foreign enemy to undo its democratic-secular fabric?

By Shamsul Islam*
Many well-meaning liberal and secular political analysts are highly perturbed by sectarian policy decisions of RSS/BJP rulers led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, especially after starting his second inning. They are vocal in red-flagging lynching incidents, policies of the Modi government on Kashmir, the National Register of Citizens (NRC), the demand for 'Bharat Ratna' to Savarkar who submitted 6-7 mercy petitions to the British masters (getting remission of 40 years out of 50 years' sentence), and the murder of constitutional norms in Goa, Karnataka and now in Maharashtra.

Rushdie, Pamuk, 260 writers tell Modi: Aatish episode casts chill on public discourse

Counterview Desk
As many as 260 writers, journalists, artists, academics and activists across the world, including Salman Rushdie, British Indian novelist, Orhan Pamuk, Turkish novelist and recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in literature, and Margaret Atwood, Canadian poet and novelist, have called upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review the decision to strip British Indian writer Aatish Taseer of his overseas Indian citizenship.

Worrying signs in BJP: Modi, Shah begin 'cold-shouldering' Gujarat CM, party chief

By RK Misra*
The political developments in neighbouring Maharashtra where a Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress government assumed office has had a trickle down effect in Gujarat with both the ruling BJP and the Congress opposition going into revamp mode.

Church in India 'seems to have lost' moral compass of unequivocal support to the poor

By Fr Cedric Prakash SJ*
In 2017, Pope Francis dedicated a special day, to be observed by the Universal Church, every year, as the ‘World Day of the Poor’. This year it will be observed on November 17 on the theme ‘The hope of the poor shall not perish for ever’; in a message for the day Pope Francis says:

'Discussed' with Modi, Gujarat Rann Sarovar proposal for Kutch runs into rough weather

By Rajiv Shah
Top Saurashtra industrialist Jaysukhbhai Patel’s by now controversial proposal to convert the 4,900 sq km Little Rann of Kutch area, an eco-sensitive zone – a UNESCO biosphere, world’s only wild ass reserve, and a nesting ground of lesser flamingoes – into a huge sweet water lake, called Rann Sarovar, has suffered a major roadblock. At least three Central agencies have expressed serious doubts about its feasibility.

'Favouring' tribals and ignoring Adivasis? Behind coercion of India's aborigines

By Mohan Guruswamy*
Tribal people account for 8.2% of India’s population. They are spread over all of India’s States and Union Territories. Even so they can be broadly classified into three groupings. The first grouping consists of populations who predate the Indo-Aryan migrations. These are termed by many anthropologists as the Austro-Asiatic-speaking Australoid people.