A recent order issued by a judge in Uttar Pradesh has sparked controversy and drawn sharp criticism from a pan-India organisation of lawyers. The Lawyers\u2019 Association for Justice (AILAJ) has written to Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, urging action against the judge for his biased remarks during the trial of a 2010 riots case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the order dated March 5, judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar, presiding over a court in Bareilly, made troubling observations that hailed Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath for his religious background while blaming Muslims for communal riots in the country. The AILAJ has condemned these remarks as “controversial, prejudicial, bigoted, and unconstitutional.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The judge’s comments not only praised Adityanath as a “religious person” occupying a position of power but also made disparaging remarks about the Muslim community, alleging “appeasement” by political parties as a cause of riots. Furthermore, the judge claimed to have received threats from Muslim groups, suggesting a bias that undermines the impartiality of the judiciary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
AILAJ has called for the expungement of these remarks from the court record and emphasized the importance of upholding constitutional values and principles of justice. The organisation has accused judge Diwakar of displaying a disregard for constitutional morality and demanded appropriate action to address this misconduct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is not the first time judge Diwakar has courted controversy. Previously serving in Varanasi, he made controversial orders in the Gyanvapi Masjid matter, further raising concerns about his impartiality and adherence to judicial ethics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The incident underscores the need for accountability and transparency within the judiciary, with calls for swift action to address instances of bias and misconduct. As the legal fraternity rallies against such prejudicial remarks, the case serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the integrity and neutrality of the judiciary in safeguarding the rights and freedoms of all citizens.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A recent order issued by a judge in Uttar Pradesh has sparked controversy and drawn sharp criticism from a pan-India organisation of lawyers. The Lawyers\u2019 Association for Justice (AILAJ) has written to Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, urging action against the judge for his biased remarks during the trial of a 2010 riots case. In the order dated March 5, judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar, presiding over a court in Bareilly, made troubling observations that hailed Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath for his religious background while blaming Muslims for communal riots in the country. The AILAJ has condemned these remarks as “controversial, prejudicial, bigoted, and unconstitutional.” The judge’s comments not only praised Adityanath as a “religious person” occupying a position of power but also made disparaging remarks about the Muslim community, alleging “appeasement” by political parties as a cause of riots. Furthermore, the judge claimed to have received threats from Muslim groups, suggesting a bias that undermines the impartiality of the judiciary. AILAJ has called for the expungement of these remarks from the court record and emphasized the importance of upholding constitutional values and principles of justice. The organisation has accused judge Diwakar of displaying a disregard for constitutional morality and demanded appropriate action to address this misconduct. This is not the first time judge Diwakar has courted controversy. Previously serving in Varanasi, he made controversial orders in the Gyanvapi Masjid matter, further raising concerns about his impartiality and adherence to judicial ethics. The incident underscores the need for accountability and transparency within the judiciary, with calls for swift action to address instances of bias and misconduct. As the legal fraternity rallies against such prejudicial remarks, the case serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the integrity and neutrality of the judiciary in safeguarding the rights and freedoms of all citizens.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":12634,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,119],"tags":[55,54,60],"class_list":["post-12635","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-blog","category-local-news","tag-entertainment","tag-news","tag-trending"],"yoast_head":"\n