As per the order, the crisis unfolded on October 28 morning when: A practical reader guide

As per the order, the crisis unfolded on October 28 morning when: A practical reader guide
  1. on October 28. The Allahabad high court has ordered criminal contempt proceedings against a group of lawyers involved in ruckus inside a courtroom (no.

The bench called for action against the advocates involved in physically assaulting state law officers, damaging courtroom property, attacking security personnel and executing a campaign of social media disinformation. Other state counsel, bench secretaries and court staff were also physically assaulted. The bench traced the genesis of the uproar to a misleading letter issued by president-elect Dr CP Upadhyay and general secretary-elect Santosh Kumar Mishra of the High Court Bar Association. The letter falsely claimed that a lawyer had been ordered to be jailed and was forced to apologise to a police officer. Refuting these claims, Justice Bhanot clarified that no jail order was ever passed or recorded. The lawyer had voluntarily apologised after misbehaving with a senior police official attending court with case records.

In its October 29 order, a division bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant also requested the chief justice to ensure that FIR is registered against the concerned lawyers for incitement to violence, conspiracy to commit violence, perpetration of violence and vandalism in the court. Further, an FIR may be registered against those who made false posts on social media pertaining to the aforesaid incident in the high court and ensure that false posts on social media platforms pertaining to the incident are blocked and deleted, observed the bench in its order made public on November 2. As per the order, the crisis unfolded on October 28 morning when an aggressive mob of lawyers disrupted proceedings by shouting slogans, forcing the court to rise. Moments earlier, senior advocate VP Srivastava had informed the bench that a circular issued on October 27 by newly elected Bar Association office-bearers—alleging he was humiliated by the court—was entirely false and groundless. The bench noted that the removal of courtroom chairs prior to 10:00 am evidenced a pre-planned incident.