MP High Court Recalls Order Prohibiting Lawyers' Appearance Before It After They Admit To Bench Hunting, Recognize Harm To Administration Of Justice

Following what appears to be an instance of ‘bench hunting’, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has decided to recall a certain order that prohibited Advocate Vinayak Prasad Shah from appearing before certain High Court benches. The division bench of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra sitting at Jabalpur observed that the lawyers who have filed the vakalath in the review petition themselves have admitted to the practice of ‘bench hunting’.

“…It is they themselves, who are stating that they are in Bench hunting which has to be stopped. They have admitted that they were Bench hunting. Therefore, in view of the admission made by the learned counsels…. that they are indulging in Bench hunting, we deem it just and appropriate that the order be recalled”, the court concluded while revoking the order dated 10.05.2022 in W.P 9298/2022.

In the said order from 2022, matters in which Advocate Vinayak Prasad Shah would be appearing were barred from being scheduled before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav who was a part of the Division Bench that included the Chief Justice.

While allowing the revision petition, the court also concurred with the petitioners who submitted that the order dated 10.05.2022 has become ‘an instrument to misuse the judicial process’, since litigants engage Vinayak Prasad Shah as their counsel as a means for ‘bench hunting’.

According to the review petition, the prohibition on listing the matters where Vinayak Prasad Shah is appearing for the parties is ‘a means of bench hunting which is not good for the administration of justice’. After referring to the submission made by the review petitioners, the Division Bench concluded that the order dated 10.05.2022 was definitely being misused to avoid the listing of certain cases before certain benches of the High Court.

The apex court in Jagmohan Bahl & Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. (2014) had heavily condemned the practise of ‘bench hunting’ or ‘forum shopping’ and pointed out that such practices have ‘no sanction in law and definitely, has no sanctity’.

“…. If the same is allowed to prevail, it is likely to usher in anarchy, whim and caprice and in the ultimate eventuate shake the faith in the adjudicating system. This cannot be allowed to be encouraged”, the Division bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice U.U. Lalit had observed back then while criticising the practice of filing successive bail applications before different benches to minimise the probability of dismissal.

Case Title: Advocate Union For Democracy And Social Justice v. High Court Of Madhya Pradesh Principal Seat At Jabalpur Through Registrar & Ors.

Case No: Review Petition No. 70 Of 2023

Click Here To Read/ Download Order