Allahabad HC’s struggle to find advocate for murder convict in 1988 case prompts review of legal aid lawyers' list

The Allahabad High Court's struggle to find a lawyer for a murder convict in a 4-decade-old case has led to an order to review the list of lawyers empaneled by the State Legal Services Authority as legal aid counsel [Bhagwan Din & others v State] 

Since at least 2018, the Allahabad High Court struggled to find counsel for a murder convict whose criminal appeal has been pending on its docket for nearly four decades

Following their conviction in 1998, four convicts – Bhagwan Din, Guru Din, Ram Din and Suraj Din - had moved the High Court against the trial court verdict and the order sentencing them to life imprisonment. Their jail term was suspended soon but the appeal has remained pending till date.

According to case records, advocate JS Sengar, who had filed the appeal in 1988, passed away. Three convicts, Bhagwan Din, Guru Din and Ram Din, also died.

Following Sengar’s death, the High Court in February 2018 issued notice to the convicts, through the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), asking them to engage counsel. In April 2028, the CJM reported back that the convicts had left their village 20 years back and shifted somewhere else.  

The Court then ordered issuance of notice to the sureties of the convicts. In July 2018, advocate HN Singh appeared on behalf of Suraj Din and informed that the three other convicts have passed away. The Court then listed the matter for hearing in August 2018.

However, the record reveals that the matter was taken up only in January this year. The order passed by Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Prashant Mishra recorded that no reply had been received in response to two communications sent to the concerned CJM.

In February, the Court noted that no counsel appeared on behalf of Suraj Din and appointed advocate Amber Khanna to argue the case. Advocate Khanna’s name was in the list of legal aid counsel prepared by the Legal Services Authority.

On March 10, the Court recorded that advocate Khanna had shown absolute disinterest to argue the case. 

“This is clear from the office report dated 9.3.2026. We also find that the Registrar General, on the same date, had tried to make efforts to serve the paper book on the learned counsel. The effort to serve the copy of the paper book was made on 26.2.2026,” the Bench noted.

It was informed that advocate Khanna practices both at Noida and in Allahabad.

The Court expressed surprise at his empanelment and called for a review of the entire list of legal aid lawyers, particularly of those practicing in different areas.

“It is strange as to how the Legal Services Authority has empaneled a lawyer who practices at two places. We are, thus, of the view that the Legal Services Authority may once again review the list which it has prepared. We do not in any manner appoint a lawyer who does not practice regularly in Allahabad. Also, from the list we find that the lawyers at Serial Nos.12, 17 and 29 do not have an enrollment number which is of the Allahabad High Court at Allahabad. This aspect of the matter may also be looked into by the Legal Services Authority,” the Bench said.

The Court has now appointed advocate Alok Ranjan Mishra as an amicus curiae to argue the surviving convict's appeal.

[Read Orders]