"To criticize Supreme Court is okay. But to lower its image in eyes of public is not good"- A top Senior Advocate pointed out the difference between the two and also pointed out challenges before Supreme Court

Sometimes a short conversation with a wise person is enough to change one's perceptions. This happened with me yesterday. To talk about bad things of any institution is easy and tasteful. But to look at it with balanced view is not within power of everyone.

The Background

The Senior Advocates of Supreme Court who charge few lakhs rupees for 10 minute discussion are not easily accessible. They are seen talking within their own circle or they are seen moving alone, mulling over some important issue to be argued in court. They are the first choice of foreign companies as well of rich litigants of India.

Fortunately for me, I found one such top Senior Advocate standing alone and waiting for his case which was about to be called out in some court.

I saw a small window of opportunity to seek his advice on my desire to write on my blog how Supreme Court has changed in last 20 years and to write how judges before 1990 were as good as Gods who treated even post cards as writ petitions.

What followed was a brief conversation which collapsed all my negative views about Supreme Court Institution to which I was also a tiny part. My respect for Supreme Court rose very high in those few minutes of conversation.

GIST OF WHAT HE SAID


I hope that perhaps, your perceptions may also change after reading what he said. I have therefore written here points from what he told me.

1)        It is not good to treat judges as Gods. They are just human beings like us. They no more need to treat post cards as writ petitions. The pre 1990 years were different. No informations were available to them. Now everything is in news. They are themselves taking Suo Motto actions on their own whenever they think they can make difference.


2)         The news media should never report what judges say in court during arguments. A judge says something and news media reports, "Supreme Court Said..... ". This is wrong. These are just momentary impulses of a judge, provoked from what is being argued or what they see in case. This does not mean that the judge will decide case in that way. When he starts dictating judgement he states each word which is judicious. The media should only report what is said by Judge in Judgement.


Then he gave an example. A Judge asked, "What is 2G and 3G?". The next day national media printed it in such a way that it looked as if "Judges in Supreme Court are dumb and they do not know meaning of 2G and 3G."

What the Judges wanted to know was what these abbreviations mean for the facts of case.

Abbreviations means different things to different persons. For example, abbreviation AA may mean something or nothing to you. But for an army man, AA means Army Act.

The media is only interested in sensationalising. This often damages one party or other party in the case. This should not been.

3)     You want to compare today's Supreme Court Judges with Judges who were here 20 years ago. It is good. It is good that you are writing on blog to educate general public. But do it in a balanced way.

The challenges which judges today are facing are enormous. All the legal machinery they had developed in so many years, have suddenly become outdated and obsolete. With old machinery they are fighting new arena of legal battles which no one had foreseen 20 years ago.

Now situations have become so complicated that every action has legal consequence.

If you tweet, retweet or Like a Facebook post, it can have legal consequences. Do you know they are now asked to decide challenges of "Clouding Wars" ?

"Clouding wars? What are they?". I really had no idea. This was news to me.

He explained, whatever you write on computer and internet uploads and get somewhere in "Clouds", "Sky Drives" or such many other spaces. A person's only protection is password. If someone gets access, his whole work, life secrets, his business and everything is destroyed. A person's whole data on his computer goes away in seconds.

These are some of the many challenges which Supreme Court Judges are facing. With old machineries are expected to fight new crimes and new challenges.

Stunned

For some moments, I was virtually stunned and stumped. I had never thought about Supreme Court in this way.


This senior advocate is among the top Senior Advocates in Supreme Court. He is often engaged by international companies. I am not free to mention his name. This short conversation changed my many negative views. I hope it will make some difference in your mind too.

Haresh Raichura

         



  

Story of a man who burnt four daughters and a wife and how his Death Sentence was converted to life by SC

The Story as I recollect


It was early morning about 3 am. The father and his 5 year old son were sleeping on terrace. His wife and four daughters were sleeping on ground floor.


Suddenly, the man stood up and went downstairs. The day before, he had purchased 5 littler kerosene. He picked up the can, poured kerosene on four sleeping daughters and his wife. And set them on fire.


You can imagine rest.


At 8 Am, the man went to police station and told police what he had done.


He said, he was a poor banana seller. Somehow, he collected few rupees. He took loan at very big interest and purchased a house for the family.


Since last one year, his wife and his daughters were nagging him daily.


They did not like the area in which he had purchased house.


They were daily nagging him and pressurising him to sell this house and to buy a house in a decent area.


It was beyond his means to do this. Being fed up with daily nagging, he burnt them.


The Case


The court gave a free lawyer to defend him. The lawyer denied that his client had committed any crime.


There were no eye witnesses. There was no evidence against him except that he had gone to purchase kerosene one day before. This could be as well a case of accidental fire.


But it was open and shut case.


The parts of burnt bed sheets and other things pointed out that this was no accident.


The Judgement


This was a "rarest of rare crime" falling in categories defined by Supreme Court. To give death sentence was mandatory in such case.


High Court


High Court confirmed death sentence.


Supreme Court


His lady lawyer in High Court called me and asked me if I could help.


Since he was poor, and since there was a chance of me becoming famous if I can get acquittal, I filed his appeal at my expanses.


The Ground


Among the many other points, I raised a point that this case should not fall in rarest of rare crime, because he had saved life of his 5 year old son who was sleeping with him on terrace.


Stay on Death Sentence


Normally, there is procedure that as soon as any appeal against any death sentence is filed, intimation goes to Jailor and death sentence is automatically stayed.


Requesting a Top Criminal Lawyer


At that time, I was new in Supreme Court. I did not want my client to suffer because of my shortcomings if any. I requested an India's top criminal lawyer to see if he can argue this matter for free. He agreed.


Verdict of Supreme Court Judges


I still remember the presiding judge Justice Doraiswamy. He was touched.


He must have been knowing how poor live hand to mouth. Here the man was selling Banana in cart and was trying to survive in a heartless society of the poor.


He reached to conclusion that this was not rarest of rare case and converted death sentence into life imprisionment.


I do not much remember about this case. But I have faint memory that the name of accused was most probably "Bhagwan".


The Supreme Court saved Bhagwan from death sentence.


CRIMINOLOGY

The law provides that punishment for murder is either Death or Life Imprisionment. But it does not say when to give death sentence and when to give life imprisionment.



So the Judges have evolved principle that Death only in rarest of rare case.

But these are not hard and fast rules. Law is evolving to meet challenges of new categories of crimes.

Haresh Raichura

Transport Permissions are mostly granted for wrong reasons. Justice J. S. Verma said this could not be done

When we walk on paths or when we cross roads, we are exposed to road accidents, mostly by Public Transport Vehicles and buses.


Permits to ply a public transport vehicle is required to be obtained from Transport Department as per Motor Vehicle Act.


Such permits are often dens of corruptions and permissions are granted in lieu of political funds.


Justice J. S. Verma, laid down a guidelines in a 1990 Supreme Court judgement.


Any public spirited citizen can file a PIL in respective High Court, if he has material to show that guidelines of this judgement are not followed.

SC: In a democracy governed by the rule of law, no government or PM or ANY CM, has the right to do what it pleases

Yes... In a democracy governed by the rule of law, no government or authority has the right to do what it pleases.

Neither Prime Minister or any Chief Minister, has any right to grant any amount from any RELIEF FUNDS without following any rule of law.


The Supreme Court said, 'All functionaries of the State are expected to act in accordance with la, eschewing unreasonableness, arbitrariness or discrimination   They cannot act on whims and fancies.  in a democracy governed by the rule of law, no government or authority has the right to how what it pleases.  Where the rule of law prevails there is nothing like unfettered discretion or unaccountable action.'


Justice R.V. Ravindran and Justice A.K. Patnaik delivered this judgement in case of State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Sanyam Lodha on 25th August 2011 in Civil Appeal No. 7333 of 2011.  This judgement is also reported in  2011 (9) SCALE page no. 379.

Haresh Raichura

23.4.2013

Sr. Counsel Argued,"In UP, they do not allow criminal trials to go until cases are filed on witnesses or till they are killed!"

Overheard a strange argument. A Sr.Advocate was arguing. He tried to paint a general picture by saying,:


"In UP they (accused) don't allow criminal trials to proceed till (false) cases are filed or till the witnesses get killed..."

I didn't hear further as I had started thinking on larger issue concerning the whole of India.

It seems that witnesses in India need two types of protections.
One against physical assaults.


Two, against filing of false cases on them by police to force them to give false evidence in court, after they have become witness!


Let us pray to God accordingly. Because it is in His hands to pass witness protection laws!


22/4/2013

Cost of pulling hair-knot of landlord's daughter- 3 month Jail & fine upto Rs.1,00,000/-? Who forgot Law of Tort?

Overheard a strange case.
The man was convicted for jail for 3 months jail and fine of Rs.5000/-.


It looked as if he was tenant and the relationship between landlord tenant might have gone sore.


The daughter of landlord complained that in some marketplace, the tenant puller her hair-knot.


Youth's prank?


Well, the case become serious. It was alleged by daughter that he also gave threat to throw acid...!


The judges and lawyers worked and put their heads together to find out what exactly was crime committed, how much truth was put in the case and how much lie was added in a partly true case, and what was the punishment as per law.


And the result was, 3 months jail and 5,000/- fine.


After wasting thousands of fees of lawyers, the man finally reached Supreme Court and begged for mercy.


Well, the punishment of jail waived but fine increased to Rs.1,00,000/- The fine will probably go to the girl.


Consider the years of legal battle of man!


Approximately, 3 and a half years from trial court to Supreme Court.
Justice is justice. Justice means wisdom of judges.

Missed Point:


Immediately after incident, the girl could have filed suit for Rs.5,00,000 or Rs. 50,000,00 for wrong done as per law of tort.


But as no such case filed, no such order !


Judges decide what is argued. If proper cases under of Law of Torts not filed, what courts can do?


22/4/13

Do you know that there is no law that before changing name of a City, permission of Central Govt is required?

There is no law enacted by Parliament that before changing name of a City, permission of Central Govt is required.


And yet... Yes, since more than 66 years, State Governments continue to send such such name change proposals to Central Government for clearance. And the Central Govt keeps sitting on such proposals for years!

Strange! Ignorance of Law! Either on my side or on sides of State Law Makers of India!


Do you want to change name of Allahabad to Prayag, or From Ahmedabad to Karnavati?

Well, tell law makers of your state that there is no need to ask from clearance of name change from Central Government unless they saw you some valid law.

Haresh Raichura
21/4/2013

SC: Directs all States to depute lady constables on all Bus Stations, Railway Stations, Cinema etc. to stop eve teasing

Supreme Court of India has directed All States to depute lady constables at Bus Stations, Railway Stations, Metro Stations, Cinema Halls to prevent Eve Teasing. If any State is not implementing these directions, legal actions can be taken.

These directions came in case of Inspector General of Police Versus S. Samuthiram [reported in 2013 [1] SCC 598] date of decision 30.11.2012 (Hon'ble Justice K.S.Radhakrishnan and Hon'ble Justice Dipak Misra)

Supreme Court has directed/ordered as pointed out below.
"Para 34.1 All the Statement Government and Union Territories are directed to depute plain clothed female Police Officers in the precincts of bus-stands and stops, railway stations, metro stations, cinema theatres, shopping malls, parks, beaches, public service vehicles, places of worship etc. so as to monitor and supervise incidents of eve-teasing. "

If violation of above directions of Supreme Court are noticed by a public spirited Citizen and if desires to take a steps, it is advisable that he should first bring the violation to the notice of concerned District Collector and District Superintendent of Police and should give them reasonable time to take necessary steps.

This can be seen from Para 34.8 as under:
"34.8 The State Governments and Union Territories of India would take adequate and effective measures by issuing suitable instructions to the authorities concerned including the District Collector and the District Superintendent of Police so as to take effective and proper measures to curb such incidents of eve-teasing 

A complete copy of judgement should be downloaded by a searching on Google or on Supreme Court website supremecourtofindia.nic.in
HARESH RAICHURA
29.03.2013

+++(Part 2) Trends of Supreme Court Judgements and why I do not understand them (On Criminal Law)

This part 2 follows Part 1.

While hearing of a Criminal Appeal was going on in Supreme Court, the presiding judge suddenly said,

"In Criminal Law, we keep swinging like a pendulum. Sometimes we go to this extreme end, and sometime we go to exactly opposite opposite end. We just don't know what we are doing."

I was sitting court. The words touched some chords in my heart instantly. I remember the presiding Judge.

He was Justice B. N. Srikrishna. One of the most learned judges of India. He knew almost all languages of India, including, fluent Sanskrit. He was a scholar. Now a retired Judge. The Judge may have today forgotten that he may have ever said such a thing. But I do remember. At least, I still have vivid impression of Judge saying this.

I can cite cases after cases to show that how stand of Supreme Court differs from case to case and as per philosophy of individual judges of Supreme Court in criminal law. But without going into specific, I will try to explain why I am unable to understand these different trends of Supreme Court.

1) Some Judges believe that if they will give deterrent punishments, the crime will reduce because criminals will become frightened.

I think they need to consider two things which one of my criminal client told me years ago.

He said, "In this country, punishment is same, whether you kill an ordinary man or whether you kill a Prime Minister".

Perhaps, what he meant to say was,"Science of Penology" is not well ploughed by Supreme Court.

Secondly, he said, in every jails, every jailor fears him. Whenever a new jailor comes in Jail, he crosses his path and says Hi.

Once a Jailor replied him to behave properly in his jail, otherwise he will break his all bones of his ass.

The criminal replied, "Even if you break all my bones of my ass, it will not make any news. But if I will give a hard slap on your face, it will become a news and it will spread in all jails in a weak. I will become Don-hero overnight."

The point is, no kind of high punishments can deter criminals from committing crime.

In India is now there is too much population.

Poor live in a hell like situation. The idea of going to jail or being hanged to death do not deter them.

They have nothing to lose in this world except their life. Life itself is a hell for poor, who suddenly in heat of hunger, commit crimes over trivial issues.


2) All judges are bound to decide cases on basis of evidence produced in case. Evidence is in mess in most cases.

The reasons:

2.1. It is the Supreme Court who have held that Public Prosecutors cannot have any security of job. His masters, employers can change them anytime. Nothing wrong if govt changes all its prosecutors after an election.

Well, now all public prosecutors are at mercy of politicians. They are not free to prosecute criminal cases freely and without interference of political bosses.

2.2 It is again the Supreme Court which has held that there cannot be stay on transfer of a police officers. No one has right to serve at particular place or on a case.

Now each police officer has to serve their political bosses also. If they carry out investigation as per rules and if they collect evidence, their political bosses will transfer them at midnight.

Remember how Khemka in Haryana was transferred in the middle of night? Did any court protect him from humiliation?


2.3 Public also have reason for not coming forward to assist police and to be witness in any case. There are no witness protections laws.

In one PIL, Govt took stand in SC, that it cannot financially afford to give witness protections. What a shame!

Well, whatever evidence now comes in court, is in mess.

The criminal laws pronounced by Supreme Court in such environment, are bound to be in mess.

Part 2 in this series complete.

Haresh Raichura

+++(Part 1) Trends of Supreme Court Judgements and why I do not understand them

It is not easy to understand trends of Supreme Court of India Judgements.

I may be practising here as lawyer since 22 years. But those who are practising here since more than 60 Years, are also not in position to explain or to predict the way in which Supreme Court may give its verdict.

In this first part, I am trying to explain reasons for this unpredictability.

1) Supreme Court, Constitution of India and Concepts of Laws, are always evolving concepts.

They are like living organisms which grow everyday. Compare them with ever flowing rivers. You cannot put your foot twice in the same river.


2) Sixth sense of Judges.

All judges from trial court to Supreme Court have sixth senses. They write in a formal and routine way. And yet, when one judge reads judgement of another judge, he gets some kind of extra sensory perception. Sometimes, such perception are crucial. They are not found in judgement. But sometimes, judges themselves tell us about it.

These are unpredictable. And in large variety. And are not taught in law schools.

In one subsequent part, I will state, what one SC Judge told us across Bar, for not setting aside acquittal of 12 murderers, who had murdered in broad daylight, in the middle of market of a village, in presence of 100 witnesses.

Still Supreme Court declined to set aside acquittal and told us "Sixth Sense" reason, on which basis Judges decide cases but do not write those sixth sense reasons in their judgements. All judges few very experienced lawyers have also sixth senses. So they to can understand.

3) No appeal against Supreme Court Judgement and they have no need to indicate reason for dismissing a case.

These gives them freedom at elbow in giving justice in last court. But there is also a danger that this freedom can tempt them to slip into "Meri Marzee Jursdiction ( My Sweet Will Jurisdiction)

Be it whatever it may be. But the fact remains that there are reasons because of which Supreme Court Judgement Trends remain unpredictable.

(Part 1 of this series complete)

Haresh Raichura
21/4/13 at 0:33 AM

Learn in 2 min all Laws of world (Hagel Philopher's method) :->

There are thousands of laws in India. Now International laws have started becoming binding on people of India because of Internet transactions.

You are asked to Agree on many websites on terms written in very small print.

It is bery difficult to know what exactly is the law.

Once, It is noted, that a man went a German philosopher Hegel and asked him, what is the law. And he said, tell me while I stand on one leg. In other words, he asked him to explain what is law in 2 mins.

Hegel said, "Do not do unto others what you do not want others to do unto you. All laws begin from here."

So simple and beautiful. Most of laws of world starts from here.

In India, there are contradictory judgements of Supreme Court.

One judgement says that fine printed terms not binding to an illiterate person unless it is specifically brought to his notice.

Later judgement says, that even terms written on web site is binding when you by an air fare ticket.

Well, Hagel is my best guide. Any terms or laws contrary to it, ought to be, need to be challenged.

Haresh Raichura
16/3/2013

Incorrect legal opinion of an advocate does not make him liable in criminal court.

This law has been decided by Supreme Court of India in case reported in 2012(9) SCC 512 A.

An opinion of an advocate, may or may not be accepted. But that will not automatically make him liable in criminal law. It has not been proved in this case that there was any criminal case in which advocate also had conspired.

Haresh Raichura

#RAPE CASES: Understand difficulties of Courts in punishing rapists

The Function of lawyers and Judges is not about seeing that rapists are not punished. They are also like you. They also want that rapists should be punished.

The Judge can punish a rapist only if there is evidence against rapist produced in court.

Accused and his lawyers are given chance to expose if evidence is false.

Evidences in rape cases are usually of following type:

1) First or earliest information recorded in police register and statement of person who gave complaint.

2) Statement of victim

3) Medical Report of body of victim.

4) Clothes: stains or tears on clothes of victim

5) Any eyewitness who show the incident or show accused going away after rape, or coming before rape, or who has seen any other things about rape.

6) Medical report of body of accused.


In above evidences, 3,4.6 are scientific reports.

But statement of victim and witnesses keep changing. Before police they say one thing, before media on TV they say another thing, in court they say something else.

When rapist is a very rich and influential person, evidence begin to disappear and court becomes helpless. This is the problem which need to be addressed.


When evidence in court is not reliable, the judge is bound to acquit the criminal even if he is personally convinced about crime of rapist.

The real burden is on Investigating Agency and on Prosecuting Agency to bring evidence in court.

By increasing punishment of rape nothing will be accomplished. In some countries, Chief Prosecutor is elected by people. If more criminals get acquitted, people may not re-elect him.

In our country, some accountability of Police Investigator and Some Accountability of Prosecutor ought to be fixed.

Probably, only Supreme Court can do something about this.

Haresh Raichura
19/4/13

We have seen cases were false rape cases are filed against political rivals and to take revenge of land disputes.

Unsolicited calls to sell products. A suggestion.

Consumers courts have awarded exemplary costs against telephone companies and bank service advertisers who keep disturbing people by unsolicited calls.

Such cases are reported in law books and also at some place in this blog.But such judgements have no desired deterrent effect.

Next when such unsolicited call come, one can try following method:

In the beginning itself tell caller politely that :

"I am recording this conversation for purpose of protecting my privacy and I am reserving my rights to claim compensation for unsolicited calls."

This method may work or it may not work. I have yet to try this method. You can try this method at your own risk if you think fit.

Because, it is costly to hire a lawyer and to file cases.

Even before going to consumer court, you have to collect addresses of parties against whom you want compensation.

You need to collect convincing evidence and records of call details. Then, big lawyers of company come

All of us are already so busy, that it is much easier and cheaper to us to simply reject a call.

But what if such calls recurrently disturb us?

Laws are good looking in law books and in offices of lawyers. But in real world, go by your practical wisdom.


Haresh Raichura
19/4/13

Learn in 2 mins 'Evidence Based Judicial Thinking" - through a small Joke

A Ticket Checker found a Judge travelling in a train without ticket.

The Judge fumbled in all his pocket, but he could not found his ticket.

Looking to his high position of a Judge, ticket collector decided to let him go.

"That's all right", said the Judge, "But unless I find ticket, how do I know where I am going?"

....,

Here, ticket is an Evidence. From ticket, it can be seen from 1) Where a man purchased ticket 2) From where he may be going.

When we say something in court during arguments, Judge interrupts and asks,"How do I know? Show me evidence of that?

This is how judicial-evidence-based thinking works.

Another simple example is following one.

A Judge will not believe that you have read this blog post unless you have some evidence prove it. Your say on oath that you have read this blog post is not enough for a judge to believe you.

(But if you share or tweet link of this blog post, it will generate digital footsteps on Internet. This can prove that at particular time on certain date, you shared this post. The Judge can then infer that it is probable that you may have read this post)

Evidence based thinking is so simple.

Haresh Raichura
16/4/13

A lawyer once told a Judge, "Sir, that lawyer is saying that Your Lordship is a FOOL". The Judge replied..

A lawyer once told a Judge, "Sir, that lawyer is saying that Your Lordship is a FOOL".

That Judge smiled and said, "It is His View. He is entitled have his views".

This joke is based on a probably real story. But I cannot find exact reference point.

Haresh Raichura
15/4/12

Normally, Supreme Court liberally grants time to surrender to a convict.

After a conviction is upheld, Supreme Court or High Court, ordinarily, liberally extends time to surrender unless there are some special reasons to refuse extension of time.


Because, after so many years, when a person has to go in jail, he has to make some arrangements of his affairs.


Courts, normally grants 4 weeks time to surrender.
But these are all problems which are looked upon by courts with compassion.


If a convict, needs some more time of a further 4 week to 6 weeks, such times are ordinarily granted.


Haresh Raichura
15/4/13

Murder for breaking queue before a water tanker?

This case had come to me before about in about 26 or 27 years ago, when I was practicing in Gujarat High Court.

In some village, there was water scarcity. The Municipality used to supply water tanker for drinking water. The women, the children, the men, used to stand in queue for water.

Some one broke queue. Quarrel erupted. One man killed another.

I argued for bail for poor accused before High Court judge that it is unbelievable that people would kill anyone just on quarrel over queue for water.

I was young. I had not seen water scarcity in villages. Nor I had seen any village.

The Judge said, this is the seventh case I am hearing in this month where murder had
taken place over quarrel about queue for water supply!

I still remember, the Judge was Justice M. B. Shah, who later retired as Supreme Court Judge.

Haresh Raichura
13/4/2012

Haste by Judges to dispose off cases speedily is actually KILLING justice.

This is a long subject. I am trying to say what I want to say in brief. The arrears of cases are actually weighing too much on mind of judges and public.
The consequent, it looks as if some judges have developed "Speedily Disposal Oriented" outlook.
I have seen that, hasty decision making process leads to miscarriage of justice and have seen clients suffering a lot.
"Decision Making" and "Judging" are two different process. Judging essentially involves, Contemplation Process which certainly takes time.
Silver lining is this, that some judges, including Chief Justice of India Justice Kabir, are not disposal-oriented judges. They deliberate, contemplate and then judge. The quality of judgements is more important than quantity of justice.
Haresh Raichura
12/4/2013

Good Lawyer (Defined by Emerson in 1860

The good lawyer is not the man who has an eye to every side and angle of contingency, and qualifies all his qualifications, but who throws himself on your part so heartily, that he can get you out of a scrape.

Two Lama on "Why Supreme Court is called Keeper of the Conscience of Nation?"

Two Lama on "Why Supreme Court is called Keeper of the Conscience of Nation?"

In the mountains of Tibet
Night was dark
And the Stars were blinking silently

Down below on a mountain
Elder Lama taught Younger Lama
On concept of Complex Questions

"A Question which has more than
A hundred correct answers can be called a Complex Question"
Explained Elder Lama

Then he asked Younger Lama
To ask any three Complex Questions

Younger Lama asked his first
Complex question

"In Schools, a bell rings at 4:00 O'Clock,
And all students and teachers
Leave schools and run to homes.
Why no bell rings in Supreme Court at 4:00 O'Clock?"

"Because Judges are not teachers
And lawyers are not students
And therefore in Supreme Court
Bell do not ring at 4:00 O'Clock"
Replied Elder Lama

(2)

Younger Lama asked his second
Complex Question

"Why Supreme Court of India
Is considered Strongest Supreme Court
In the world?"

"Because no Supreme Court in world
Knows how to direct Executives
To allocate more Budget funds to Judiciary,
To increase salaries of Judges
And appoint number of Judges
Proportionately to number of case.
Indian Supreme Court has been
Doing this silently since years.

And therefore it is called
Strongest Supreme Court of world"
Replied Elder Lama

(3)

Younger Lama asked his third
Complex question

"Why Supreme Court of India
Is called "Keeper of Conscience of Nation?"

"Because they have a mysterious compass, which keeps telling them
What is good for the 1.21 billion Indians

This mysterious compass is
Hidden somewhere in premises of
Supreme Court of India

And therefore it is called
"Keeper of the Conscience of Nation"
Replied Elder Lama

Night moved on slowly
Giving place to a New Morning


Haresh Raichura
An advocate

Is it possible to bring surprise witness in Court as per movie Jolly LL.B?

It once happened years ago in Gujarat High Court when I was practising there.

I had filed a PIL to free some bonded labourers. After High Court issues notice to Govt and Police, the main witness, a bonded labourer disappeared before next date of case.

The police and Govt explained to court that there is no evidence in my PIL.

I pointed out that there are two more bonded labourers who are witnesses and I have kept them hidden in next court room!

The court allowed me to produce them. I succeeded. About 300 bonded labourers were freed.

In another PIL, after High Court issued notice, the corporate house let loose its wolves on petitioner. He called up me to withdraw petition. I asked him to send me written instructions.

The company's lawyer, through some middleman, called me, offered bribe to withdraw PIL.

Bribe was not issue. But there was danger to life of petitioner. I placed the letter of client on record and matter was disposed off. The Judge understood my silence.

Since then I avoid filing PIL. It is not good for an ordinary man to file a PIL. There are so many wheels under wheel.

The normal rule of Evidence is clear that before producing a surprise witness, notice to other side has to be given and permission of court by a written order is necessary.

But in PIL, the courts are not bound by technicalities. In fact it can constitute a SIT type fact finding committee and can ask it to give report.

In a PIL, matters, Courts can certainly do what Judge in Jolly Ll. B. did.

However, the proceedings do not go as projected in movie. There are some procedures which has to be followed by Judge.

By and large. The movie has done a great job in telling people, about how helpless a judge and a good lawyer is, when evidence start disappearing:(

The life of PIL lawyer is always in danger. I know a very good PIL lawyer who died mysteriously.

So far as I am concerned, I have learned lessons and I avoid going into waters were sharks are swimming.

Haresh Raichura
1/4/2013