The court affirmed the fundamental right to liberty, criticizing the unlawful denial of bail and violence by Bar members against petitioners seeking legal representation.

ORDER

1. The custodians of justice (Members of the District Bar Association, Barabanki) have turned into perpetrators of violence, which has led the petitioners to knock the doors of this Court to protect their Fundamental Rights by way of this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

2. The present writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, preferred by the petitioners, presents a sorry state of affairs with respect to the conduct of law professionals, particularly in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

3. The petitioners are contractual employees of a company, named, M/s. Skylark Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd., and are permanent residents of the State of Madhya Pradesh. They were posted for toll collection duty at the Gotona Bara Toll Plaza on the Lucknow- Sultanpur Highway, in District Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh.

4. On 14th January, 2026, an advocate, namely, Mr. Ratnesh Shukla [hereinafter, being referred to as the ‘complainant’], allegedly refused to pay the requisite toll charges while passing through the said toll plaza. Consequently, a verbal spat ensued between the complainant and the staff posted at the toll plaza, which subsequently escalated into a scuffle. It is alleged that the petitioners, being the employees of the operating company and posted at the toll plaza, assaulted the complainant.

5. An F.I.R., bearing No. 15/2026 came to be registered at P.S. Haidergarh, District Barabanki on 14th January, 2026 at the instance of the complainant for the offences punishable under Sections 115 (2), 352, 351(3), 109(1), 110, 311 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

6. It is the case of the petitioners that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to them at the time of their arrest. The petitioners were thereafter produced before the learned A.C.J.M., Barabanki and were remanded to judicial custody by order dated 16th January, 2026. It is further averred in the writ petition that the remand proceedings do not reflect compliance with the mandatory requirement of communicating the grounds of arrest to the accused persons.

7. It is also stated that, immediately after the registration of the F.I.R., members of the Bar Association started violent protests, as is the usual feature these days. Most notably, what is most unfortunate is that even the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh joined the fray and addressed a letter to the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh requesting invocation of the provisions of National Security Act against the petitioners even though the incident pertained to a trivial scuffle.

8. It is further stated that a resolution was passed and circulated within the local bar to the effect that no advocate would represent the accused persons in connection with the FIR No. 15/2026. Notwithstanding the aforesaid resolution, one advocate, namely, Shri Manoj Shukla, displayed considerable courage and filed a bail application on behalf of the petitioners on 5th February, 2026. Shortly thereafter, the members of the Bar resorted to unruly behaviour and the office furniture of the said advocate was set on fire, and his effigy was also burnt. The news relating to these acts of hooliganism and arson has been published in the local newspapers, and the copies thereof have been annexed with the writ petition. The photographs placed on record clearly depict that the furniture of the advocate was set to fire. The news report of these incidents as published in the ‘Dainik Bhaskar’ newspaper, Lucknow City Edition dated 6th February, 2026, is reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference: -