On 28 October 2026, a protest by lawyers at the Allahabad High Court escalated into chaos inside the courtroom of Justice Ajay Bhanot. The demonstration, which followed allegations of judicial misconduct, resulted in furniture being hurled and prompted immediate judicial intervention. The incident led to calls for contempt proceedings and raised concerns about decorum within constitutional courts.
According to The Indian Express, the protest was triggered by the Allahabad High Court Bar Association’s call to boycott Justice Ajay Bhanot’s court. The association alleged that the judge had compelled a lawyer to apologise to a Superintendent of Police after the lawyer objected to the officer occupying a row typically reserved for advocates. The Bar Association also claimed that Justice Bhanot threatened to send the lawyer to jail and mocked a senior advocate during the proceedings.
As reported by Bar and Bench, the situation escalated when advocates assembled outside Justice Bhanot’s courtroom, raising slogans and allegedly throwing furniture and other items towards the dais. Video footage from the court premises showed the extent of the disruption, with reports also claiming that a shoe was thrown at the judge, though this detail could not be independently confirmed.
Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal responded to the incident by directing the registrar (protocol) to obtain CCTV footage and identify those involved for the initiation of contempt proceedings. Coverage revealed that the judge described the conduct as “contemptuous” and emphasised the need for mutual respect between the bar and the bench. Instances of such vandalism in constitutional courts are considered rare.
“The incident of vandalism inside the courtroom and the hurling of abuses at the judge cannot be tolerated. Whatever may be the grievances of the lawyers, they ought not to have resorted to physical or verbal violence. Such conduct, in my opinion, is clearly contempt in the face of the court. The bar and the bench are two wheels of the same chariot. Both must respect each other,” advocate Paras Nath Singh stated.
As highlighted by Live Law, the Bar Association’s letter to the Chief Justice, dated 27 October 2026, detailed the sequence of events and warned of a boycott if no action was taken. The association objected to the practice of arranging separate seating for police officers in the courtroom and described the judge’s conduct as “contemptuous,” urging the Chief Justice to intervene.
Statements from the Bar Association indicated that the protest was a direct response to perceived humiliation of advocates and the alleged preferential treatment of police officials. Analysis showed that the association’s leadership, including its president and general secretary, signed the communication demanding action and accountability.
In the aftermath, the High Court administration began reviewing CCTV evidence to identify those responsible for the disruption. The process for contempt proceedings was set in motion as details emerged. The incident has prompted discussions within the legal community about maintaining order and upholding the dignity of judicial institutions.
“If the court is free to insult a lawyer, then the lawyer will also not hesitate to insult the court,” the Bar Association’s letter stated, reflecting the heightened tensions between the bench and the bar.
While the protest was condemned by several legal professionals, the Bar Association maintained its stance on seeking redress for the alleged mistreatment of advocates. The Chief Justice’s office has yet to issue a public statement regarding the incident, but internal reviews and disciplinary measures are underway following reports from the court premises.
Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.