13 Judges of the High Court in Allahabad opened the front against a ruling of the Supreme Court, that is the case - 13 judges of the Allahabad High Court opened a front on a decision of the Supreme Court

In a strict direction issued on August 4, Justice or Supreme Court JB Pardiwala and Justice RK The Bank of Mahadevan urged the Chief Justice of the High Court in Allahabad to remove Justice Prashant Kumar from the trial of criminal cases to his retirement and must sit in the bank with an experienced senior judge. Legal Correspondent, Jagran, Prayagraj. 13 Judges of the Allahabad High Court demanded a full court meeting against Justice Prashant Kumar on the jurisdiction of the recent order of the Supreme Court. Justice Arindam Sinha and other judges wrote a letter to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali on this. Request to call a full court meeting of the Chief Justice, in a strict direction issued on August 4, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice RK The Bank of Mahadevan urged the Chief Justice of the High Court in Allahabad to remove Justice Prashant Kumar from the trial of criminal cases to his retirement. Sit. These instructions and sharp remarks against Justice Kumar were given for his decision in which he said that criminal prosecution could be used as an alternative way of recovering money in civil controversies. The Supreme Court does not have administrative superintendent over the Supreme Court, according to sources, Justice Arindam Sinha today wrote a letter to the Chief Justice in which he expressed astonishment and pain about the Supreme Court order. Justice Sinha wrote in the letter: “August 4, 2025 received a notice on thematic order without instructions to issue notice, and that includes sharp conclusions against the judge of the scholar.” The judge has proposed that the full court of the Supreme Court is taking a promise that the Supreme Court will not follow the order to remove Justice Kumar from the list of criminal cases, as the Peak Court does not have administrative superintendent at the Supreme Court. He also said that the full court must “take up its pain regarding the vote and sentiment of the said order. The Supreme Court Bank said by the Supreme Court Bank that it had strictly commented on the understanding of the criminal law of the Supreme Court Judge.” We are shocked by the findings recorded in paragraphs 12 of the disputed order. The judge even said that it would be very inappropriate to ask the complainant to take civil measures as civil cases last a long time, which is why the complainant may be allowed to initiate criminal proceedings. “The court took this order on a petition that imposed the order of the Supreme Court to give an edge on the lead. The petition in the Supreme Court to cancel the proceedings that the dispute was completely civilian.