SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 516

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ
VISHVJEET AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER – Respondent
WRIT PETITION(CRIMINAL) NO(S). 109 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Not stated
For the Respondents: Mr. Rohit K Singh

The court emphasized the protection of fundamental rights against violence, mandating bail and case transfer for fair trial.

Headnote:The petitioners, contractual employees at a toll plaza, sought relief under Article 32 of the Constitution due to unlawful acts by Bar Association members, resulting in denial of legal representation. The Court highlighted the need for justice and proper legal representation, ultimately ordering their release on bail and transferring proceedings. The court asserted the importance of protecting fundamental rights despite prevailing violence among the legal community.

Result: The petitioners are entitled to bail and case transfer to Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi.

Judgement Key Points

The legal document pertains to a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by petitioners who are contractual employees at a toll plaza. They sought protection of their fundamental rights due to unlawful acts committed by members of the local Bar Association, which resulted in the denial of legal representation and created an environment of fear. The incident involved a scuffle at the toll plaza, leading to the registration of an FIR and subsequent arrests of the petitioners.

The court emphasized that the violence and hooliganism by members of the legal community tarnished the reputation of the legal profession and created an atmosphere detrimental to justice. Despite the violence, the court found that the petitioners' detention for over two months was unjustified, especially since the FIR did not suggest they should be denied bail.

In response, the court ordered the immediate release of the petitioners on bail, subject to furnishing personal bonds. To ensure a fair trial, the proceedings were transferred to a court in Delhi, specifically the Tis Hazari Courts. The court also directed the police to ensure the safety and escort of the petitioners upon their release. Additionally, the court condemned the acts of hooliganism by members of the Bar and directed the relevant authorities to take appropriate disciplinary and security measures.


Table of Content
1. petitioners seek protection under article 32 due to violence. (Para 1 , 2)
2. incident at toll plaza leading to legal complications. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8)
3. fear of violence prevents legal representation. (Para 7 , 9 , 10)
4. court condemns violence and emphasizes fundamental rights. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
5. directives for bail and case transfer are issued. (Para 17 , 19 , 20)

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: -

“Daini

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top