The Allahabad High Court has found that the acts of lawyers who allegedly assaulted State law officers, court staff and security personnel and vandalized a courtroom on October 28 over alleged ill-treatment of lawyers by Justice Ajay Bhanot, prima facie constitute criminal contempt.

The Court also requested the Chief Justice to consider issuing directions for the registration of FIRs against the lawyers allegedly involved and persons who circulated false social media posts about the incidents.

A Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant observed that the lawyers' conduct scandalized the Court, interfered with the due course of judicial proceedings and obstructed the administration of justice.

"The Court cannot turn a blind eye to the incident in the name of harmony between the Bar and Bench. Appeasement of violence in Court will make the Courts vulnerable to blackmail and not prevent recurrence of violence", the Court remarked.

It added that violence is not sated by appeasement and it can be curbed by bringing the perpetrators to justice and by establishing the deterrence of law.

The Bench opined that criminal contempt proceedings were liable to be drawn against the concerned lawyers.

Hence, it directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice so that he can place it before an appropriate Bench for prosecution of criminal contempt proceedings in accordance with law.

The Court also requested the Chief Justice to consider directing the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court to ensure that FIR is registered against the concerned lawyers for incitement to violence, conspiracy to commit violence, perpetration of violence and vandalism in Court and any other criminal offences which are made out.

The order for FIR registration also covers those persons who put out false social media posts concerning the incidents in the High Court on October 27 and 28. The Court proposed that such posts be blocked and deleted.

The observations and directions were issued in a suo motu proceeding concerning an incident in Court No. 49 on October 28, when a group of lawyers allegedly disrupted proceedings and assaulted Additional Government Advocates (AGAs), court staff and security personnel.

According to the order, when the judges (Justice Bhanot and Justice Samant) were preparing to move from their chamber to Court No. 49 that morning, they were informed that a group of lawyers assembled in the courtroom was restive and shouting slogans.

Senior Advocate VP Srivastava appeared before the Court and clarified that there had been no incident of his humiliation in the courtroom on October 27. He stated that proceedings had remained amicable while he was present.

However, other lawyers began shouting loudly, making it impossible for the Court to conduct proceedings. The Court consequently rose.

After the judges returned to their chambers, AGA-I Paritosh Kumar Malviya approached them in a distressed condition. The order records that his face was swollen and he was walking with difficulty.

He informed the judges that a group of lawyers had savagely assaulted him inside the courtroom after the Court rose and threatened him for appearing on behalf of the State.

Other AGAs, including Sanjeev Pandey, Pradeep Jaiswar and Sandeep Tiwari, also informed the Court that they had been assaulted and threatened. The Registrar General's report and statements of the AGAs were considered by the Bench.

The Court recorded that lawyers had hurled abuses at the Court, raised aggressive slogans, physically assaulted State law officers and court staff, and indulged in violence and vandalism during court hours.

Court furniture was damaged and turned upside down, while security personnel were also physically attacked.

"The Court could not function on account of the aforesaid criminal acts of the lawyers," the Bench observed.

The Court also referred to a letter dated October 27 issued by Dr. CP Upadhyay, Senior Advocate and President-elect of the Allahabad High Court Bar Association, and Santosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate and General Secretary-elect.

The letter threatened to boycott the court of Justice Ajay Bhanot, alleging that he humiliated an advocate during court proceedings and also mocked a senior Advocate.

In the letter addressed to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court through the Registrar General, the newly elected office-bearers of the Bar Association sought appropriate action over an incident stated to have occurred in Justice Bhanot's Court on the same day.

The Bench found these allegations to be factually incorrect. It noted that Srivastava himself had appeared before the Court and clarified that no such incident of humiliation had taken place. The Court also observed that no order directing that a lawyer be sent to jail, as alleged in the letter, had been passed.

It remarked that the Bar Association office-bearers had not approached the Court to verify the facts before issuing the letter.

Addressing the relationship between the Bar and the Bench, the Court said that dialogue between them must be animated by mutual respect and that differences must not degenerate into violence or intimidation.

"The obligation of the Bar to speak truth to power is not a license to incite violence against individuals and disaffection against the institution," the Bench observed.

It added that "Anarchy is not a species of dissent. Freedom of speech at the Bar is not the freedom to slander the Bench".

The Court said the legal process has robust traditions and structures for debate and dialogue between the Bar and the Bench, but no room for intimidation or violence. Incitement to violence and violence itself, it observed, were not components of legal discourse but ingredients of criminal offences.

The Bench also expressed concern over the circulation of false information and half-truths on social media following the incident. It said that such posts could create disaffection against the High Court and interfere with the judicial process.

The Registrar General's report dated October 28 was directed to be placed in a sealed cover.

The Bench concluded by appreciating Senior Advocate VP Srivastava and the AGAs who had spoken about the incident, observing that they had "stood on the burning deck to tell the truth and to uphold the process of this Court".