The Supreme Court said that “a mere perusal of the FIR is sufficient to satisfy us that it was not a case where the accused could be denied bail”. File | Photo credit: The Hindu
The Supreme Court has come down hard on members of Uttar Pradesh’s Barabanki District Bar Association for vandalizing a toll plaza and ransacking the office of a fellow lawyer after he appeared for tolling staff, saying the legal profession is now tainted by such acts of “hooliganism”.
On January 14, five persons allegedly assaulted advocate Ratnesh Shukla, a resident of Pratapgarh, during a dispute over the passing of a car at a toll plaza in Haidergarh tehsil.
The incident sparked protests, with a large number of advocates gathering at the toll plaza on the Lucknow-Sultanpur stretch of National Highway 731 and forcing traffic to stop.
Later, a resolution was passed and circulated by the local bar association that no attorney would represent the accused persons.
Despite the order, Advocate Manoj Shukla filed a bail application on behalf of the accused and thereafter the members of the Bar Association resorted to unruly behavior and the office furniture of the said Advocate was set on fire and his effigy was burnt.
The accused then petitioned the Supreme Court for bail as no lawyer was ready to represent them in the trial court and also sought transfer to the court.
Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta condemned the role of Barabanki Bar Association members indulging in “hooliganism” by damaging the furniture etc. of the advocate who had applied for bail on behalf of the petitioners.
“The facts established reveal a very deplorable state of affairs. The legal profession, which was once considered a noble profession, has clearly been tarnished and sullied by the hooliganism committed on the basis of the riots that took place at the toll plaza on January 14, 2026.
“We understand the fraternal sentiments among lawyers, but this cannot in any way justify the acts of violence and lawlessness that took place when a brave lawyer stood up to defend the accused. These deplorable acts of hooliganism deserve to be condemned. The disciplinary body i.e. Bar of India is expected to take appropriate action in this regard.
The Supreme Court said that “a mere perusal of the FIR is sufficient to satisfy us that it was not a case where the accused could be denied bail”.
“There is no dispute that the appellants were performing their duties at the toll plaza where the incident occurred. It cannot be ruled out that the appellant may have resisted the appellants’ attempt to collect the toll (rightfully), resulting in a rift between the appellant and the toll officials, ie the petitioners here,” the bench said.
The Supreme Court said that denying bail to the accused and restricting their liberty for more than two months is absolutely unjustified and violates the fundamental right to liberty.
“To ensure that the accused get proper legal representation and fair trial, we direct that the proceedings arising out of FIR No. 15/2026 be transferred to the Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi for all further measures, ie, remand, submission of investigation results and trial,” the court said.
The Supreme Court said that the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh will be responsible for the safety and security of the petitioners and ensure that the petitioners are properly escorted to a safe place after being granted bail.
Published – 18 March 2026 19:52 IST
