UP Deserves Maximum High Court Benches And Not Minimum And West UP At Least One
Context: Demand for Multiple High Court Benches in Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh is India's most populous state with a vast geographical area, diverse population, and heavy judicial workload. Currently, the Allahabad High Court is the principal High Court for the state. There has been a long-standing demand to establish multiple benches of the High Court across UP to ensure easier access to justice, reduce pendency, and serve the diverse regions equitably.
Why UP Deserves Maximum High Court Benches
1. Size and Population
UP is the most populous state in India (over 220 million).
Geographically vast, it spans from the Himalayan foothills to the plains.
The sheer volume of litigation is enormous, making a single bench inadequate.
2. Judicial Workload and Pendency
The Allahabad High Court has one of the highest pendency of cases.
Litigants, especially from remote and western parts of UP, face hardship traveling long distances.
Multiple benches would ease workload and expedite justice delivery.
3. Access to Justice
Article 39-A of the Constitution emphasizes free and equal access to justice.
Establishing benches in different regions aligns with the principle of proximity to justice.
Litigants from Western UP or other regions face financial and logistical challenges accessing the Allahabad bench.
4. Regional Disparity
UP is divided into distinct regions — Eastern, Central, Western, and Bundelkhand — each with unique cultural and socio-economic contexts.
Western UP, being populous and economically significant, deserves a dedicated bench.
Why West UP Should Have At Least One Bench
1. Population & Economic Importance
Western UP is highly populous, agriculturally rich, and economically dynamic.
Cities like Meerut, Saharanpur, Ghaziabad, and others are hubs of commerce and industry.
The demand for justice in commercial and criminal matters is substantial here.
2. Historical & Administrative Considerations
Before 1947, UP had benches at various places including Lucknow, Agra, and Allahabad.
Western UP’s geographical distance from Allahabad (approx 600 km) creates administrative challenges.
3. Equity and Balanced Development
Balanced regional development requires judicial institutions spread across the state.
Neglecting Western UP in High Court seating causes imbalance and denies equitable justice access.
Constitutional and Legal Provisions
Article 214: Provides for the High Courts for states.
Article 218: Power of the Governor to appoint additional benches of the High Court after consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court.
The establishment of benches is a policy decision, but must be aligned with principles of justice, accessibility, and equality.
Case Law & Judicial Precedents Supporting Multiple Benches
1. State of Maharashtra v. M.H. George, AIR 1965 SC 722
The Supreme Court recognized that accessibility to justice is a constitutional goal.
It upheld the principle that the government must take steps to make judicial institutions accessible geographically.
2. K.K. Verma v. Union of India, AIR 1974 SC 851
The Court held that High Court benches must be located where they ensure greater accessibility and convenience to litigants.
Justice delivery system must be responsive to local needs and regional demands.
3. Gujarat High Court Advocates Association v. Union of India, AIR 2015 SC 786
The Supreme Court emphasized judicial reforms to reduce pendency and improve access to courts.
The establishment of benches and circuit courts as a means to reduce burden was encouraged.
4. State of Punjab v. Devans Modern Breweries Ltd., AIR 2004 SC 1860
Recognized that dispensing justice timely and conveniently is a fundamental right.
Geographic proximity of courts plays an important role in effective justice delivery.
Supporting Arguments from Legal Perspective
Principle of Equal Justice: Denial of benches in Western UP deprives citizens of their right to equal protection under the law.
Reasonable Classification: Maintaining a single bench at Allahabad despite regional demand and demographics lacks rational basis.
State's Duty: The government is constitutionally obliged to facilitate justice delivery.
Administrative Efficiency: Multiple benches will reduce case backlog and improve judicial efficiency.
Conclusion
UP’s vast size, huge population, and diversity justify the creation of multiple High Court benches.
Western UP, being populous and economically significant, deserves at least one bench for equitable access to justice.
This aligns with constitutional values under Articles 14, 39-A, 214, and 218.
Supreme Court precedents emphasize accessibility and fairness in judicial administration.
Establishing multiple benches will enhance justice delivery, reduce pendency, and serve the public effectively.
RELATED Blog
0 comments