Allahabad High Court Bars Advocate From Entering Its Premises For Three Years Following Contempt Conviction
The Allahabad High Court has barred an advocate from practicing law and entering the premises of the High Court’s Allahabad and Lucknow benches for a period of three years, following his conviction for contempt of court earlier this year.
A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Brij Raj Singh passed the order in continuation of its April 10, 2025 ruling, where he was sentenced to six months of simple imprisonment and fined ₹2,000 for contemptuous behavior. This included using abusive language towards judges in open court proceedings, where he reportedly referred to them as “goondas,” and appearing before the court improperly dressed with his shirt unbuttoned.
The Court stated, “The contemnor is restrained from practicing and appearing before this Court at Allahabad and Lucknow for a period of three years. He is also restrained from entering in the premises of High Court at Allahabad and Lucknow during the said period, unless specially ordered by this Court.”
The Advocate had urged the Court to reduce the restriction period from three years to three months, citing that his legal practice is his sole means of livelihood. However, the Bench rejected his plea observing, “Looking into the previous act of contemnor, more specifically when earlier contemnor was restrained from entering in the premises of this Court for two years, and despite that, contemnor has not shown any improvement in his conduct, we are not satisfied with the aforesaid submission.”
After sentencing him in April, the Court had also asked him to show cause why he should not be debarred from practicing for three years. In response, he filed a recall application, but the Court found no merit in his arguments. It noted, “The order dated 10.4.2025 was passed after giving a thorough hearing to the contemnor. Since it is not an ex-parte order, there does not appear any reason to recall the same. The same considers at length all the submissions that were made by the contemnor. Therefore, we do not find any reason to recall the order passed after hearing the contemnor.”
During the hearing on the issue of punishment, he had requested parity with the punishment imposed on advocate Prashant Bhushan by the Supreme Court in 2020—a token fine of ₹1 for contempt of court. However, the High Court declined this comparison, highlighting that unlike Bhushan, he had a history of multiple contempt proceedings and punishments.
The Court noted that he had already been sentenced to three months of imprisonment in a 2017 contempt case and was previously barred from the High Court premises for two years. Moreover, it recorded that six other contempt petitions were currently pending against him.
Additionally, the Court referred to his inappropriate courtroom attire, noting that he had admitted to keeping his shirt’s top two buttons open while addressing the bench, and had failed to button them even after being asked to do so. He offered no justification for this conduct.
Given these circumstances, the Court held that his apology was neither timely nor genuine. The Court said, “Looking into the submission of the contemnor as also his previous conduct and punishments, we do not find any reason to accept his apology, as the same is very belated and is also not bonafide. We also do not find any reason to make any modification in the punishment awarded to the contemnor by order dated 10.4.2025 of six months’ simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.2000/-, and in case of failure to pay the fine within one month, the contemnor shall undergo further imprisonment of one month.”
Finally, the Court allowed him two months from May 26 to surrender before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, and directed him to deposit the ₹2,000 fine before the Senior Registrar of the High Court within one month.
Cause Title: State of U.P. v. Asok Pande, [2025:AHC-LKO:31027-DB]
