‘Tantamount to bench hunting’: Allahabad High Court raps lawyers over repeated absences, junks POCSO bail plea

New DelhiApr 29, 2026 04:27 PM IST The Allahabad High Court said the unjustified use of judicial time must be curbed and the party wasting it should compensate the adversary as well as the judicial system. (Image generated using AI)Allahabad High Court news: The Allahabad High Court recently observed that advocates not appearing in listed cases amounts to professional misconduct and is also tantamount to bench hunting. Justice Krishan Pahal made the observation after the counsel for an accused in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act had failed to appear repeatedly. Taking exception to the repeated absence, the court observed that such conduct was becoming common in several cases, and dismissed the bail plea. Justice Krishan Pahal made the observation while hearing the accused’s bail plea on April 15.“Advocates are not appearing in majority of listed cases that too on multiple dates. Non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant amounts to professional misconduct. It also tantamount to bench hunting or forum shopping,” the Allahabad High Court remarked in its order dated April 15. Repeated absence The court noted that the bail application, filed on February 6, 2025, had come up on multiple dates: November 28, 2025, January 12, 2026, March 17, 2026, and again on the date of the hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the applicant to press the matter. Even when the case was taken up in the revised list, counsel remained absent. The Allahabad High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v Gopal, where it had categorically held that courts shall not grant adjournments in a routine manner. It was also opined that the courts have to be diligent and take timely action to usher in an efficient justice dispensation system and maintain faith in the rule of law, the Allahabad High Court said while referring to the top court’s ruling. The court emphasised that mere pendency of a bail application does not accrue any right in favour of an applicant, nor can a case be allowed to remain pending indefinitely under the “cloak of pendency”. It further added that an applicant cannot be permitted to “dilute the stream of justice” by repeatedly remaining absent without reasonable explanation, calling such conduct a “blatant abuse of process of law”. ‘Wasting judicial resources’ The court also expressed concern over the wastage of scarce judicial resources, stating that it was already stretched beyond limits and valuable court time required for the adjudication of serious judicial action is wasted on frivolous and vexatious litigation. The Allahabad High Court observed that the unjustified use of judicial time must be curbed and the party wasting the resources should compensate not just the adversary but also the judicial system. Additionally, reliance was placed on the Supreme Court’s recent observations in Lakshya Tawar vs Central Bureau of Investigation, where the top court said high courts, particularly in matters involving personal liberty, are not expected to keep cases pending for long periods with repeated adjournments. The Allahabad High Court concluded that the applicant appeared to have lost interest in pursuing the matter. “Therefore, by the efflux of time, it seems to have been rendered infructuous,” the court said, and dismissed the bail plea. Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience. Expertise Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents. Specialized Legal Reporting: His wo