Lawyers with Allahabad High Court
Published on: 20 Jul 2026, 4:03 am
Listen to this article
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that the Bar associations in Uttar Pradesh have failed to take remedial steps against advocates who have turned into gangsters and “mafia elements” [Mohammad Kafeel v State of UP and Another].
Justice Vinod Diwakar said such advocates have taken the legal profession as a means of seeking safe refuge, and even judges in the district courts have refrained from taking any action against them as they enjoy protection from pressure groups and political powers.
The Court added that every district court has “organized gangs of law graduates” who are involved in executing court decrees and resolving disputes outside the court through coercive means, intimidating vulnerable litigants, and who are actively carrying out the forcible eviction of tenants and property occupants.
“As a consequence, young Advocates and newly recruited judicial officers- possessing pristine and receptive judicial minds- are finding it increasingly difficult to function effectively, fairly and independently within this deeply unconducive professional environment, vitiated by a small but powerful and dominant group,” the Court said in an order passed on June 3.
Lamenting about this state of affairs, the Court began its order by observing,
“Law dies twice, once when its officers turn criminal, and again when Judges choose silence over judicial courage. In both cases, the rule of law is the first casualty.”
Law dies twice, once when its officers turn criminal, and again when Judges choose silence over judicial courage.
Allahabad High Court
“The legal profession- whose primary obligation is to uphold the rule of law and assist the administration of justice- has in Uttar Pradesh been infiltrated by elements antithetical to everything it stands for: gangsters, mafias, and individuals, who never acquired the educational qualifications that the law requires. The Bar Council, the profession’s statutory guardian of integrity, has, for decades, failed in its most basic regulatory duty.”
The Bench was dealing with a matter in which had taken note of pending criminal cases against advocates. The Court said that while a considerable number of cases stand registered against lawyers across districts, the disciplinary proceedings are conspicuously limited to only a handful.
Data revealed that a total of 4,157 advocates are involved in 5,056 criminal cases in 75 districts. . At least 418 advocates are involved in three or more cases. 28 advocates have been booked in 11 or more cases, 126 have five to ten cases and 264 have three to four cases.
The Bench said it was concerning that even advocates with as many as 46 cases against them continue to be permitted to practice before the courts. It noted that the Wazirgunj police station in Lucknow alone accounts for 236 cases against 422 advocates.
The Court also took note of fake degrees among advocates, stating that 105 cases identified by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh did not reflect the reality.
“Given the enormous size of the enrolled advocate population in Uttar Pradesh- one of the largest in the country- the identification of only 105 advocates with fake qualifications, after a state-wide verification drive, is wholly disproportionate to the scale of the problem that realistically exists.”
Justice Diwakar observed that the continued presence of advocates allegedly linked with organized crime raises a serious institutional concern and may be indicative of a Bar Council that has, in some measure, “been rendered ineffective in regulating such conduct.”
Considering the situation, the Court directed that all criminal cases registered against any advocate in a district Bar association shall be transferred en bloc to courts of another district located at least 100 km away from the home district of the advocate.
The Court also directed the State Bar Council to ensure that FIRs are registered against each of the 105 identified advocates whose degrees were found to be forged during verification, for the offences of forgery, cheating, and impersonation, or under any other provision of law.
Further, it ordered the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against advocates involved in heinous crimes and asked the Bar Council to consider suspension of their licenses.
“Advocates who are habitual offenders and are involved in offences repeatedly cannot, prima facie, be said to bear a conduct that is ‘morally good’. Bearing good character is a mandatory requirement for a law graduate to enrol as an Advocate,” the Court said.
The Court also called for an audit of 5.37 lakh registered advocates for identification of fake enrollments and ghost advocates. It added that 2.6 lakh advocates who have not obtained their certificate of practice may be served with show-cause notices, and their enrolments may be reviewed.
The Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh may request the Bar Council of India to amend rules on an urgent basis to make police verification of character and antecedents a mandatory prerequisite for enrollment as an advocate, the Court further suggested.
Attachment
PDF
Mohammad Kafeel v State of UP and Another
Preview
Allahabad High Court
Justice Vinod Diwakar
