Won't accept gunda raj: Chief Justice after lawyer alleges assault in court
A lawyer alleged a brazen assault inside Delhi's Tis Hazari court complex. Chief Justice Surya Kant has called for urgent action, warning that 'gunda raj' will not be tolerated in the judiciary.

A lawyer’s appeal alleging a brazen assault inside a Delhi district court moved Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Monday to call for prompt action, saying “gunda raj” would not be tolerated.
The allegation was raised during an oral mention before a Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and NV Anjaria. The lawyer sought urgent intervention, claiming he was attacked on February 7 inside the Tis Hazari Courts complex.
“I was appearing before the Tis Hazari court in a court of ADJ (Additional District Judge) Harjit Singh Pal. I was appearing on behalf of the accused. The complainant’s advocate, with many goons, attacked me... They hit me, and the judge was sitting right there. All members of the court were there,” the lawyer told the bench.
The Chief Justice questioned why the lawyer had chosen to make an oral mention instead of filing a formal complaint. “You want to mention before me so that media can catch up?” he asked, as quoted by Live Law.
The lawyer replied that the police were reluctant to act and said he was raising the issue as a member of the Supreme Court Bar Association.
Chief Justice Kant directed him to approach the Delhi High Court chief justice through a written complaint and said the matter would be dealt with administratively.
“This happened on February 7. Have you informed this to the Delhi High Court chief justice. Write a letter to the Chief Justice and mark that to me as well. Let the High Court Chief Justice take cognisance,” he said.
The Chief Justice underscored that such incidents strike at the core of the justice system. “Action will be on the administrative side. This kind of ‘Gunda Raj’ is not acceptable to us. This means the failure of the rule of law. Do this and tell me,” he said.
The bench reiterated that the appropriate forum for redress was the jurisdictional high court and asked the lawyer to move the Delhi High Court for further action.

