Allahabad High Court Orders Emergency Security After Lawyers Assaulted at Lucknow District Court

The Allahabad High Court's Lucknow Bench convened an emergency evening sitting at 7:00 PM on July 21, 2026, after three Delhi-based advocates and their client were allegedly assaulted inside the Lucknow District Court premises. A Division Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla dispensed with procedural formalities, ordered immediate police protection for the victimised advocates, and directed the Lucknow District Judge and Commissioner of Police to submit detailed reports and CCTV footage of the incident.

On July 23, 2026, the same bench converted the matter into a suo motu Public Interest Litigation, registering it as a case titled "Suo Motu Cognizance of the Incident in District Court Lucknow dated 21/07/2026." The bench considered the reports of the District Judge and Commissioner of Police, the FIR lodged against the alleged assailants, a video clip produced by the applicants, and CCTV footage before reserving its order on interim directions.

The Incident at Lucknow District Court

The incident took place on July 21, 2026, when advocates Abhipsa Mohanty, Komal Agarwal, and Ashutosh Srivastava arrived at the Lucknow District Court to file their Vakalatnama in Suit No. 2933 of 2025, a civil property dispute listed before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ms. Neha Gangwar. The three advocates were engaged by Mohd. Shakir, the client in the property matter.

According to the application filed before the High Court, advocate Saurabh Kumar Verma, who represents the opposing party in the property dispute, along with his associates, intercepted the Delhi-based advocates and prevented them from entering the court complex. The applicants allege that they were physically assaulted, verbally abused, and threatened. Their client, Mohd. Shakir, was also allegedly beaten. The advocates state that they were stopped from filing the Vakalatnama, effectively denying them and their client access to the court.

High Court Emergency Response

The speed of the High Court response was notable. The emergency 7 PM bench was convened on the same day as the incident, with the court dispensing with procedural technicalities in the interest of public importance. The bench treated the matter with urgency given that the incident involved violence within court premises, which strikes at the very foundation of the justice delivery system.

The immediate directions issued by the court included ordering the Lucknow Police to provide security to the three victimised advocates and their client, directing the District Judge of Lucknow to submit a detailed report about the incident along with CCTV footage from the court complex, and directing the Commissioner of Police, Lucknow, to submit a separate report on the incident and the steps taken by the police.

Conversion to Suo Motu PIL

When the matter came up again on July 23, 2026, the bench took the significant step of converting it into a suo motu PIL. This conversion signals that the court views the incident not merely as a private dispute between individual advocates but as a matter of systemic concern affecting the administration of justice. The newly registered PIL was connected with a batch of pending writ petitions, with Criminal Writ PIL No. 8810 of 2023 remaining the leading case.

By registering a suo motu PIL, the Allahabad High Court has ensured that the matter will receive continued judicial attention and that broader issues of safety of legal practitioners in court premises can be addressed. The bench has reserved its order on interim directions, which are expected to set standards for security arrangements within court complexes in Uttar Pradesh.

Legal Provisions on Violence Against Advocates

Violence against advocates within court premises engages multiple legal provisions. Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, assault is punishable under Section 115 (voluntarily causing hurt) with imprisonment up to one year, a fine up to Rs 10,000, or both. Section 117 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt) carries imprisonment up to seven years and a fine. If the assault is intended to deter a public servant or any person from discharging duty, Section 121 applies, carrying imprisonment up to three years and a fine.

Additionally, criminal intimidation under Section 351 of BNS is punishable with imprisonment up to two years, a fine, or both. Obstructing an advocate from performing professional duties within court premises may also constitute contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as it interferes with the due course of judicial proceedings.

Advocate Safety: A Systemic Concern

The incident at Lucknow is not isolated. Assaults on advocates within court premises have been reported from multiple jurisdictions across India. Several states, including Telangana, have introduced or proposed legislation specifically aimed at protecting advocates from violence. The Bar Council of India has also called for enhanced security measures at courts.

The Supreme Court has emphasised in multiple rulings that court premises must be secure spaces where all officers of the court, including advocates, can discharge their duties without fear. Any violence within court premises undermines public confidence in the justice system and constitutes an affront to the rule of law.

Implications for Court Security

The Allahabad High Court suo motu PIL could result in significant directives regarding court security in Uttar Pradesh and potentially serve as a model for other states. The court is expected to address matters including mandatory CCTV surveillance coverage in all court complexes, protocols for registering FIRs when violence occurs in court premises, security screening and access control at court entrances, and grievance mechanisms for advocates and litigants who face intimidation.

Related Reading

Supreme Court Upholds Minimum Viva Voce Cut-Off for District Judge Recruitment in Rajasthan

Faizabad Bar Files Criminal Complaint Against Ram Temple Trust Officials Over Donation Theft

Key Takeaways

1. The Allahabad High Court convened an emergency 7 PM bench on July 21, 2026, and ordered immediate police protection for three Delhi-based advocates assaulted at Lucknow District Court.

2. On July 23, the bench converted the matter into a suo motu PIL, signalling it views the incident as a systemic concern rather than a private dispute.

3. Advocates Abhipsa Mohanty, Komal Agarwal, and Ashutosh Srivastava allege they were physically assaulted and prevented from filing a Vakalatnama by advocate Saurabh Kumar Verma in a property dispute.

4. The court interim directions include submission of CCTV footage and police reports, with further orders on interim measures reserved.

5. The case could lead to broader directives on court security, CCTV surveillance, and protocols for addressing violence within court premises in Uttar Pradesh.