The Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana (BCPH) has taken decisive action against alleged "bench hunting" at the Punjab and Haryana High Court, issuing notices to 16 lawyers, including two senior advocates. This move follows a suo motu inquiry initiated by the Privilege Committee after media reports and court observations suggested potential manipulation of the bench allocation process.
Bench hunting refers to the practice where lawyers attempt to have their cases assigned to specific judges, often to secure favorable outcomes or avoid particular benches. The Bar Council views such conduct as a grave misuse of lawyers' rights that threatens the integrity and reputation of the legal profession and the judicial system.
The notices were issued in connection to a high-profile case involving real estate developer Roop Bansal, where allegations of bribery against a judicial officer have surfaced. The Privilege Committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhan, convened on August 7, 2025, to examine records related to the case (CRM-M-19843-2025, Roop Bansal vs State of Haryana), along with related high court orders and news reports. The committee's order, released on Friday evening, stated that if proven, the allegations would amount to a severe attack on the dignity and ethics of the legal profession.
The 16 lawyers who have been asked to respond to the issue are J K Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Bindu, APS Shergil, Senior Advocate Rakesh Nehra, and Senior Advocate Puneet Bali. All are alleged to have appeared or acted on behalf of Roop Bansal in the matter.
The Privilege Committee has directed all 16 advocates to appear before them on August 16, 2025, at 3 p.m., either in person or through their lawyers, to explain their position. They are also required to submit written replies.
In addition to the 16 lawyers, responses have been sought from senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi, though they have not been formally served notices as they are not enrolled with the Punjab and Haryana Bar Council. The committee is seeking their responses in the interest of a comprehensive adjudication.
The committee's notice highlights "prima facie" material pointing to an attempt to manipulate the bench assignment process of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a "tactful, systematic and organised manner". The alleged conduct is described as "an invasion of the temple of justice". The notice singles out J.K. Singla as potentially having played a "key role" in orchestrating the strategy but emphasizes that such a "well-planned and strategised" effort could not have been executed by one person alone, suggesting the involvement of multiple individuals.
The Bar Council has likened the practice of bench hunting to "rotten apples in the basket" and stressed the need to remove them before the entire profession's integrity is compromised. The council has also appealed for information or complaints from advocates or affected persons, to be sent via the committee's email or official WhatsApp number.
The matter gained prominence after a complaint was received by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The case was subsequently de-listed from the bench of Justice Mahabir Singh Sandhu, who had reserved its verdict after hearing the matter. Chief Justice Nagu, in his order, hinted at bench hunting by the lawyers involved. Prior to Justice Sandhu, several other benches had recused themselves from hearing the case, and even after the matter was taken from Justice Sandhu, other judges recused themselves.
The Privilege Committee's notice draws parallels with historical events and moral analogies, referencing the Mahabharata and quotes from figures like Mahatma Gandhi, B.R. Ambedkar, Lord Denning, and Justice Brandeis. The committee emphasized that "silence and inaction in the face of injustice enable further injustice".
