Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Monday, June 15, 2026

Biggest National Disgrace That Allahabad HC Has Just One High Court Bench

Posted in: Judiciary
Fri, Jun 5, 26, 04:23, 2 Weeks ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 24441
Analyzing judicial pendency, constitutional concerns, access to justice, and the long-standing demand for a High Court Bench in Western Uttar Pradesh.

Allahabad High Court Pendency and the Demand for a Bench in Western Uttar Pradesh

It is indisputable that the Allahabad High Court is the biggest High Court in not only just India among all the States, in not only just Asia, in not only just few continents, in not only just many continents but in all the continents all over the world with maximum number of pending cases more than 12 lakhs in Allahabad High Court which is maximum among all the States in India and here too it is West UP which owes for majority of pending cases with more than 10 crores people for whom Dr BR Ambedkar recommended separate Statehood itself and separate High Court itself just like for Eastern and Central UP and still Allahabad High Court which tops State list in having maximum number of pending cases and has more than 4 lakh advocates enrolled in Allahabad High Court which is highest in the world and UP Bar Council is also the biggest Bar Council in the world.

But still Centre is most dead determined never to allow even a single High Court Bench not even a single High Court Circuit Bench in any nook and corner of Uttar Pradesh other than the one created by Jawaharlal Nehru way back in July 1948 so close to Allahabad High Court and most astoundingly attached litigants of 30 districts of West UP and hilly areas of undivided UP with not even Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad which is biggest betrayal of Constitution and deepest burial of justice and worst mockery of poorest litigants of 30 districts of West UP and hilly areas of undivided UP as long as it formed part of UP which made practically just no sense at all and culminated in partition of Uttar Pradesh 26 years ago!

Ideally, UP should have been partitioned into Eastern, Western and Central UP as was suggested by Dr BR Ambedkar but leave alone partition and separate High Court, Centre has treated West UP as unworthy to be given even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench which has to be most strongly condemned! How long will Centre pat itself on the back that UP has just one High Court Bench created 78 years ago so close to Allahabad High Court at Lucknow where it was just not needed at all?

Key Issues Highlighted

  • Allahabad High Court has the highest pendency among all High Courts in India.
  • West UP contributes a substantial share of the pending litigation.
  • More than 10 crore people reside in West UP.
  • Only one Bench exists in Uttar Pradesh, located at Lucknow.
  • No High Court Bench or Circuit Bench has been established in West UP.
  • Dr BR Ambedkar had recommended separate Statehood and separate High Court arrangements.

Single Bench in India's Most Populous State

It is ostensibly most astounding to see that the most populated State of India that is Uttar Pradesh which tops the State list in having maximum number of pending cases among all the States has only High Court Bench at Lucknow so close to Allahabad High Court created way back in July 1948 and nowhere else!

What is even more baffling to note is that West UP which contributes maximum to the State’s economy more than 80% apart from contributing to majority of pending cases of Allahabad High Court as acknowledged even by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself which recommended permanent seat of High Court Bench in West UP about 50 years ago yet not even a Circuit Bench created till date and litigants attached with not even Lucknow which falls much earlier but right uptill Allahabad which is far away from even Lucknow and due to which poor and middle class litigants who travel by train have to spend whole night and nearly a day all the way till Allahabad due to West UP not having even a single Bench not even a Circuit Bench despite having 30 districts with more than 10 crore population which ideally should have been given separate High Court itself like most of the States in India!

The whole point is: Centre has been most unduly harsh with West UP and has always forwarded one lame excuse or the other to deny West UP even a single Bench not even a Circuit Bench even as we are standing on verge of 80 years of independence which is just few months away and even 100 years not very far away!

West UP Judicial Access Concerns

Issue Observation
Population More than 10 crore people in West UP
Districts Covered 30 districts
Economic Contribution More than 80% contribution to State economy (as stated)
Bench Availability No High Court Bench or Circuit Bench in West UP
Travel Burden Litigants often travel overnight and nearly a full day to Allahabad
Commission Recommendation Justice Jaswant Singh Commission recommended a permanent Bench in West UP

Constitutional Equality and Judicial Distribution

There can be just no gainsaying that Allahabad High Court is most overburdened with huge backlog of pending cases which is highest among all States still most mercilessly Centre feels most proud in depriving Allahabad High Court from having multiple High Court Benches and this is in breach of fundamental right to equality as enshrined in Article 14 of Constitution but most perplexingly even Apex Court never dared to take suo motu cognizance of it!

On what basis Maharashtra has maximum High Court Benches in India when its population is more than half less of UP and just about one crore more than West UP and when it comes to pending cases has less pending cases than not only UP but even less than West UP yet Centre has been most passionate in ensuring that West UP is deprived from having even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench to say the very least?

Why only five States – Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal and Karnataka have multiple High Court Benches and on what basis?

States with Multiple High Court Benches Mentioned

State Status Mentioned
Maharashtra Multiple High Court Benches
Madhya Pradesh Multiple High Court Benches
Assam Multiple High Court Benches
West Bengal Multiple High Court Benches
Karnataka Multiple High Court Benches

Call for Supreme Court Intervention

Why lawless Bihar and Orissa don’t have even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench? Who is masterminding such despicable discrimination without any prima facie reason to justify it?

It is high time and Supreme Court must act now and put a complete full stop to the most merciless discrimination that has been perpetrated in distribution of High Courts, High Court Benches and High Court Circuit Benches in different States and different regions without any prima facie reason for such most merciless discrimination to be perpetrated.

This is happening in judiciary itself yet Supreme Court has never dared to take suo motu cognizance of it not even when UP was undivided and people of hilly areas of undivided UP had to travel thousands of kilometers all the way till Allahabad most horribly even though Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself recommended two Circuit Benches at Dehradun and Nainital and a permanent Bench in West UP in Agra yet not one created and Maharashtra which already had multiple High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji was given one more at Aurangabad in 1980s as recommended and now last year on August 18, 2025 we saw fifth High Court Bench created at Kolhapur for just 6 districts started functioning!

Recommendations and Observations

  • Creation of a High Court Bench in West UP.
  • Consideration of Circuit Benches in underserved regions.
  • Review of recommendations made by the Justice Jaswant Singh Commission.
  • Reassessment of judicial infrastructure distribution across States.
  • Reduction of travel burden on litigants from distant districts.
  • Addressing pendency through decentralization of judicial institutions.

Centre: The Biggest Stumbling Block for a High Court Bench in West UP

The point being made here is that it is Centre which most unscrupulously has been acting as the biggest stumbling block for creation of High Court Bench in West UP on one pretext or the other which has only served to portray it in poor light. It is also not hidden from anyone that it is Centre which is the biggest litigator in our nation!

For my esteemed readers exclusive indulgence, I must bring out here that the Single Judge Bench of Allahabad High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Kshitij Shailendra in a most notable judgment titled Radhey Shyam Yadav vs Sri Ashok Nath Tiwari, the District Inspector of Schools in Contempt Application (Civil) No. - 6468 of 2022 that was pronounced recently on May 19, 2026 laments in para 20 with a heavy heart stating that:

“In heavily burdened constitutional courts, like our Allahabad High Court, where around 400, 500, 600 and sometimes more than 800 cases are listed every day before every Judge, judicial proceedings may consume considerable time for disposal; sometimes years and sometime decades also. Still people all around may expect such overburdened judges to become ever-working super robots or super computers or super-human beings? If during such pendency, parties are permitted to openly defy operative directions, the administration of justice would descend into chaos and anarchy. The law does not countenance such audacity.”

Absolutely right! Why more than half of Judges seat even in Allahabad High Court keep lying vacant when we now see that in Supreme Court Judges strength has been increased and all vacancies have also been filled?

West UP Still Without Even a Circuit Bench

Above all, still Centre for undisclosed reasons is most dead determined never to allow even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench in West UP which has more population than majority of States in India except UP of which it is part and Bihar and Maharashtra and owes for majority of pending cases of Allahabad High Court and still most strangely has not even a Circuit Bench for nearly 80 years of independence!

Such a rotten state of affairs in judiciary itself in distribution of High Courts and High Court Benches and High Court Circuit Benches deserves to be lit fire at the earliest because it is making the biggest mockery of Constitution but also of poorest litigants of West UP and those places where High Court Bench is being denied unfairly!

This is the most biggest stain on Indian judiciary and yet lies unwashed since so many decades nor those who are culpable for master minding such sinister discrimination perpetrated without anyone ever being held accountable by even Supreme Court!

Key Concerns Regarding the Demand for a High Court Bench in West UP

  • West UP has a population larger than many Indian States.
  • The region contributes a majority share of pending cases before the Allahabad High Court.
  • No High Court Bench or Circuit Bench has been established in the region despite nearly 80 years of independence.
  • Litigants continue to face enormous travel expenses and hardship.
  • The issue remains unresolved despite repeated demands and recommendations.

Contrasting Treatment with Other Regions

Now Karnataka State Government has recommended for creation of Circuit Bench in Mangaluru for just 3 districts but for 30 districts of West UP we saw that UP CM Yogi Adityanath recommended to Allahabad High Court for creation of a High Court Bench in West UP in January 2024 only to withdraw the recommendation the very next day!

It is lack of political will that West UP has been most mercilessly deprived from having even a single Bench not even a Circuit Bench!

When more than Rs 42 crore can be spent for linking Allahabad to Meerut by Ganga Super Expressway then why can’t a very small amount be spared for creating a High Court Bench in West UP?

Comparison of the Situations

Region Proposal Coverage Status
Mangaluru (Karnataka) Circuit Bench 3 Districts Recommended by State Government
West UP High Court Bench 30 Districts Recommendation Withdrawn

Dire Need for a High Court Bench in West UP

Practically speaking, the dire need for a High Court Bench in West UP cannot be overstated!

Perhaps the most telling part is that the only lesson Centre is learning from history on this count is that it is refusing to learn any lesson even after the partition of UP in 2000 on this very ground of litigants encountering huge problems, expenses in travelling all the way till Allahabad most foolishly!

Why is Centre quavering in an “open and shut” case like setting up of a High Court Bench in West UP?

Law Commission Recommendations Ignored

This is the way in which judiciary is functioning in a democratic country like India that despite 230th Report of Law Commission of India headed by eminent legal jurist and former Supreme Court Judge Late Hon’ble Dr AR Lakshmanan having recommended 17 years ago creation of High Court Benches in States has been restricted to just few States with big States like UP, Rajasthan, Bihar and Orissa left in the lurch which is the biggest national disgrace!

States Facing the Bench Deficit

State Issue Highlighted
Uttar Pradesh Demand for additional High Court Benches remains unresolved
Rajasthan Limited Bench distribution concerns
Bihar Lack of adequate High Court Bench infrastructure
Orissa Long-standing demand for additional Bench facilities

Need for Supreme Court Intervention

Adding fuel to fire is that even media and national news channels and national newspapers rarely ever accord it any primacy in reporting this!

It is high time and Supreme Court must act now and put a complete full stop to the most merciless discrimination perpetrated in distribution of High Court and High Court Benches and High Court Circuit Benches in different States and different regions with impunity without any prima facie reason for such most merciless discrimination for so long unhindered!

No denying it!


Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A - 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 19, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Rahendra Baglari v. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M) writ petitioner for adjoining a Judicial Magistrate and the High Court and its Registry as Respondents to his plea against the order passed by the said Magistrate.
Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal vs.Uttarakhand long standing or established status quo brought about by judgments interpreting local or state laws, should not be lightly departed from.
Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur apart from High Court at Mumbai but on the contrary UP which has maximum pending cases in India
It is most shocking to see that a peaceful, one of the most developed and most prosperous state like Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur
I am neither a member nor supporter of BJP or any other political party nor a member of any of BJP's affiliated organizations like the RSS or VHP or any other organization.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited advocates cannot throw away legal rights or enter into arrangements contrary to law. It was also made clear that any concession in law made in this regard by either counsel would not bind the parties.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on December 28, 2020 had expressed shock and deep concern on the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police against lawyers, including the search conducted at the premises of an advocate representing some of the accused in the North-East Delhi riots cases.
media trial during criminal investigation interferes with administration of justice and hence amounts to contempt of court as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Jamal v. Maharashtra dismissed a plea filed by the National President of BJP Minority Morcha – Jamal Anwar Siddiqui seeking 'X' category security.
Duroply Industries Limited and anr. Vs Ma Mansa Enterprises Private Limited in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction has recalled its own order of an injunction passed in a trademark dispute as the Judge presiding over the case had appeared for one party in respect of the same trademark in the past.
At the outset, it must be stated rather disconcertingly that it is India's misfortune that UP which has the maximum population more than 23 crore as Yogi Adityanath
At the outset, it has to be stated without mincing any words that it merits no reiteration that Judges age for retirement must be now increased to 75
Rajeev Bhardwaj v. H.P while dismissing a plea seeking a declaration of a sitting Judge's dissenting view as Coram non-judice and non est in the eyes of law.
Adv KG Suresh vs UOI has declared as unconstitutional the bar on lawyers representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals constituted under the Maintenance Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Maintenance Act).
Bar Council of India ensured that there is an entrance exam now for all those lawyers who want to practice which has to be cleared before lawyers can start practicing.
It is a matter of grave concern that while our Constitution enshrines the right to equality as postulated in Article 14 but in practice what we witness is just the reverse.
seeking interim bail/parole for the under-privileged and under-trial prisoners/convicts keeping in view the terrible havoc unleashed by the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
When an intellectual giant like Fali Sam Nariman whom I personally rate as the world's top jurist and it is not just me but his extremely impeccable credentials are acknowledged in legal field, it is not just India but the whole world which listens to him in silence
Treasa Josfine vs Kerala that a woman who is fully qualified cannot be denied of her right to be considered for employment on the ground that she is a woman and because the nature of the employment would require her to work during night hours.
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a Committee to suggest reforms in our criminal justice system which has been facing repeated criticism for its various drawbacks
Congress government's rule in Centre, Kapil Sibal who was Union Law Minister had written very categorically to UP Government for creating a high court bench for West UP at Meerut
completely about the truthfulness of the retracted confession and should corroborate his/her confession as it is unsafe to convict an accused person solely on the basis of the retracted confession
Thabir Sagar vs Odisha the practice of Advocate's clerks filing affidavits on behalf of parties is unacceptable. Such a practice is in gross violation of Rule 26 of the Orissa High Court Rules. It has therefore rightly directed its Registry to ensure that steps are taken forthwith to stop the practice of accepting such affidavits
COVID situation in UP, the Allahabad High Court has issued revised fresh guidelines for the functioning of all the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it.
amended its rules to make criticism and attack of Bar Council decisions by members a misconduct and ground for disqualification or suspension or removal of membership of a member from the Bar Council.
CJI NV Ramana who was appointed as the 48th CJI on 6th April, 2021 and took oath as CJI on 24th April 2021 has very rightly expressed his concern on the social media noise and how it adversely impacts the institutions also like judiciary to a great extent which actually should not be the case.
At the crucial meeting of the Central Action Committee. of more than 20 districts of Bar Association of West UP held at Aligarh
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan
When finances are needed for the purpose of improving the judicial system at the lower levels, there is reluctance to make such finances available.
rarely ever booked and made to face the consequences which only serves to further encourage men in uniform to take it for granted to indulge in worst custodial torture
Tarun Saxena vs Union of India as ultra vires Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which bars lawyers from representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand was mowed down by an autorickshaw has sent shivers down the spine. The ghastly incident happened on morning of July 28 near the Magistrate colony of Dhanbad that was close to the Judge's residence.
Suman Chadha & Anr. vs. Central Bank of India in that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Rajasthan High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2020 which shall be applicable to the proceeding of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and all the Subordinate Courts of the Rajasthan with immediate effect.
Arun Singh Chauhan v/s MP deprecate the conduct of a practicing advocate who chose not to answer the repeated queries of the Court pertaining to the maintainability of his petition seeking issuance of a writ of quo warranto and regarding the non-impleadment of a necessary party
Dr.Mukut Nath Verma vs UoI Allahabad High Court imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on an advocate Dr Mukut Nath Verma after concluding that he unauthorisedly filed a writ petition on behalf of suspended and absconding IPS officer Mani Lal Patidar and also levelled serious allegations against state authorities and thereby misleading the Court.
Anil JS vs Kerala that instances of allegations about the police disrespecting the citizens were arriving at its doors with alarming regularity and therefore issued certain general directions in its judgment.
If there is one Judge on whom I have blind faith for his exemplary conduct throughout his brilliant career and who can never favour wrongly even his own son
Indianisation of our legal system is the need of the hour and it is crucial to make the justice delivery system more accessible and effective.
the gang war of different gangs have now reached right up to the court premises itself which are supposed to be the holiest shrines for getting justice.
It is not just for enjoying life or going for some holiday trip that lawyers of West UP repeatedly keep going on strike since last many decades.
CM Yogi Adityanath UP has progressed by leaps and bounds which one certainly cannot deny but why is it that it has just one High Court Bench only and that too just approximately 200 km away at the city famously called Nawab City
Just changing name of Allahabad to Prayagraj won't change the ground reality. It is a proven fact that High Court is still called Allahabad High Court and not Prayagraj High Court.
It is most shocking that all the Chief Justices of India from 1947 till 2000 were never shocked nor were any world famous jurist like Nani Ardeshir Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan among many others
Raggu Baniya @ Raghwendra vs UP has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to instruct the District Magistrates of all the districts to re-evaluate the cases for remission after 14 years of incarceration even if appeals in such cases are pending in the High Court.
Union Minister of State for Law and Justice – SP Singh Baghel who is also an MP from Agra again in Western UP and who just recently took over has made it clear that his ministry was open to the setting up of a Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UP.
Anil Kumar and Anr. Vs Amit that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Shashank Singh vs/ Honourable High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, a Judicial Officer regardless of his or her previous experience, as an Advocate, cannot apply and compete for appointment to any vacancy in the post of District Judge.
It must be stated at the very outset that it is quite bewildering and baffling to see that the state of UP which Ban ki moon who is the former UN Secretary General had slammed as the rape and crime capital of India
most powerfully raised vocally the legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is the crying need of the hour also.
Top