Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

In a recent development, the Allahabad High Court directed the preservation of CCTV footage from a Ghaziabad courtroom following an alleged assault on two lawyers. Court sought the footage to be placed before it. 

Petitioners Rohit Gola and Bhavnish Gola, both practicing lawyers in the District Judgeship of Ghaziabad, claimed they were attacked while pressing an application regarding a civil suit before the Civil Judge (Senior Division).

According to the petitioners’ counsel Adv Prabhav Srivastava, they were advocating for the restitution of possession after a High Court stay on a lower court's order.

The petitioners alleged that the incident, which took place on September 18, 2024, was immediately reported to police via the emergency helpline. They subsequently requested the preservation of the CCTV footage for evidence. However, on the following day, an FIR was filed against them by the opposing party rather than any action taken on their complaint.

In response, the high court ordered that the CCTV footage of the incident be presented before it in a sealed cover by November 7, 2024.

Furthermore, the division bench of Justices Siddhartha Varma and Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi directed that till then no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in the case lodged by the opposite party.

The petitioners approached the high court seeking to quash the First Information Report (FIR) lodged against them on September 19, 2024.

Advocates Rohit and Bhavnish Gola were representing one Yatendra Sharma in a property dispute involving ownership and possession of a residential property in Ghaziabad. Sharma claimed ownership and sought an injunction, which led to a civil sui in the Ghaziabad Court.

In January 2023, the Ghaziabad Court ordered Sharma's possession to be restored, but entry was reportedly blocked, leading Sharma's counsel to request police assistance. The defendants challenged this order, securing an interim stay in May 2024. 

Dissatisfied, Sharma’s counsel sought relief from the Allahabad High Court, which lifted the stay in August, allowing re-entry efforts to proceed.

Despite high court order, delays continued. On September 18, after learning of potential case transfer, Advocate Rohit Gola filed application 175-C, urging that the case not be transferred, as arguments were ongoing and the high court had mandated expeditious disposal. 

Allegedly, during the hearing in the application, disruptions were made by the defendants, including threats and physical altercations in the courtroom with the petitioners. 

Case Title: Rohit Gola And Another Vs. State Of Up And 2 Others