The Allahabad High Court has directed the identification of advocates who allegedly raised slogans and disrupted court proceedings in the corridors during a protest over the October 27 courtroom incident involving Justice Ajay Bhanot.

The Court described their conduct as "absolutely contemptuous" and said it could refer the matter to the Bar Council of U.P. to initiate disciplinary proceedings, while also initiating contempt proceedings.

A bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal passed the order earlier today while hearing a bail application. The Court recorded that certain advocates had started raising their voices in the corridor outside the courtroom, interrupting the proceedings.

The development follows a protest by advocates over an incident on October 27 in Court No. 49, where Justice Ajay Bhanot was presiding.

The Allahabad High Court Bar Association wrote to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali on Tuesday, threatening to boycott Justice Bhanot's court while alleging that he had humiliated an advocate during court proceedings and mocked a senior advocate.

According to the Association's letter, an advocate had objected to a police officer occupying a particular seat in the courtroom.

The Association alleged that Justice Bhanot subsequently ordered the advocate to be sent to jail and compelled him to apologize to the officer. It further alleged that the judge mocked senior advocate VP Srivastava.

The letter warned that if no appropriate action is taken, the Allahabad High Court Bar Association would boycott Justice Bhanot's court.

Against this backdrop, advocates staged a protest on Wednesday. According to media reports, some lawyers also hurled furniture inside Justice Bhanot's courtroom.

The protest-related commotion also disrupted proceedings in the adjoining courtroom of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, who took serious note of the incident. He remarked thus:

"Such incident amounts to interference the Court proceedings as poor litigants come to the High Court for redressal of their grievance, and merely because some of the Advocates have problem with particular Court, they cannot be permitted to raise slogans, shout and disturb to other Courts' proceedings and use such words which is in the nature to intimidate the Court. This is wholly unjustified."

Describing the conduct as “absolutely contemptuous,” the Court directed the Registrar (Protocol) to obtain CCTV footage from the camera installed outside Court No. 66 and identify the advocates involved and submit a report on the next date.

The case was adjourned to November 19.