Bar Association’s violent obstruction of legal representation warrants transfer of criminal trial to ensure fair proceedings.

The petitioners, contractual employees of a toll-operating company and residents of Madhya Pradesh, were posted at the Gotona Bara Toll Plaza in District Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh

On January 14, 2026, an advocate allegedly refused to pay toll charges, leading to a scuffle and the subsequent registration of FIR No. 15/2026 under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

The petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on January 16, 2026, allegedly without being communicated the grounds of arrest

Following the arrest, the local Bar Association passed a resolution prohibiting any advocate from representing the petitioners

When one advocate filed a bail application, his office furniture was set on fire and his effigy was burnt by other members of the Bar

Due to this atmosphere of violence and the refusal of local counsel to provide representation, the petitioners approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 seeking bail and a transfer of the case

The Court primarily exercised its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India to protect the Fundamental Right to Liberty guaranteed under Article 21

It emphasized the necessity of ensuring a fair trial and the right to legal representation, deprecating the "hooliganism" of the Bar which hindered these rights

The Court also referred to the procedural requirements of arrest and the role of the Bar Council of India as a disciplinary body for legal professionals

The Court observed that the incident arose from a "trivial scuffle" while the petitioners were performing their bona fide duties at a toll plaza

It found that the Bar Association’s conduct—including violent protests, resolutions against representing the accused, and arson—created an atmosphere of fear that effectively deprived the petitioners of access to legal remedies

The Court determined that the denial of bail for over two months for such an offense was "absolutely unjustified" and a direct violation of Article 21

By applying its powers under Article 32, the Court concluded that judicial intervention was necessary because the local legal environment in Barabanki had become too compromised to support the constitutional mandate of a fair trial

The Court directed that the petitioners be released forthwith on bail upon furnishing personal bonds

To ensure a fair trial, the Court ordered the transfer of all proceedings arising from FIR No. 15/2026 from Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh, to the Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi

Additionally, the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, was directed to ensure the safety of the petitioners and provide them with an escort upon release

The Bar Council of India was directed to take appropriate action against the members of the Bar involved in the acts of violence