AN ADVOCATE GENERAL SHOULD NOT BE A MERCHANT OF VENICE
By Aires Rodrigues
The Advocate General is a very high Constitutional authority appointed under Article 165 of our Constitution. The Governor of each State appoints a person who is qualified to be a High Court Judge as the Advocate General. The Office of the Advocate General is a very exalted one. As the supreme law officer of the State he is expected to be extremely honest, sincere and competent in giving invaluable fair legal guidance to the State Government in formulation of its policy and execution of its decisions. An Advocate General should never be someone who has a lust or greed for wealth or having vested interest with any lobby but has always to ensure the State's best interests at heart. Though he is appointed by the State, he is bound to be fair in giving advice to the State as also in his submissions to the Court. A statement made by the Advocate General in a Court binds the Government.
Advocate General is the Leader of the Bar and is required to defend the State while always securing its interests at all times. As a role model to the legal fraternity he has to uphold impeccable integrity and the highest ethical standards. An Advocate General of a State apart from being a constitutional functionary is also a public official and acts of public officials in discharge of their official duties is open to public scrutiny against any illegal acts.
In 1975 Justice Krishna Iyer heading a 7-Bench of the Supreme Court had held "The Bar is not a private guild, like that of 'barbers, butchers and candlestick-makers' but, by bold contrast, a public institution committed to public justice and pro bono publico service. The central function that the legal profession must perform is nothing less than the administration of justice. The official heads of the Bar i.e., the Attorney General and the Advocate-Generals too are distressed if a lawyer 'stoops to conquer' by resort to soliciting, touting and other corrupt practices"
In 2005 Lord Bingham of Cornhill of the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago in a judgment had observed "It may be that the jury would incline to regard a practising lawyer as a man of probity whose word was prima facie worthy of belief. But the belief of lawyers in their own probity is not universally shared, and there are those who believe them to be capable of almost any chicanery or sharp practice."
Professional ethics demands that a person occupying the high and solemn constitutional post as Advocate General should never appear for a private party in a case where the government is directly or even indirectly a party. Once appointed as Advocate General, it is incumbent upon him to realize that his penchant for bolstering his private practice and thus raking in the moolah, cannot be achieved by any unholy means. An Advocate General is engaged and given a Constitutional position, to give appropriate advice to the Government, uninfluenced by political considerations. He being an important functionary in the legal system and in the dispensation of justice, his conduct at all times must be beyond any shadow of doubt.
The Supreme Court in a very recent judgment while pulling up the Government Advocate who misled the Rajasthan High Court has observed "As far as the counsel for the State is concerned, it can be decidedly stated that he has a higher responsibility. A counsel who represents the State is required to state the facts in a correct and honest manner. He has to discharge his duty with immense responsibility and each of his action has to be sensible. He is expected to have higher standard of conduct. He has a special duty towards the court in rendering assistance. It is because he has access to the public records and is also obliged to protect the public interest. That apart, he has a moral responsibility to the court. When these values corrode, one can say "things fall apart". He should always remind himself that an advocate, while not being insensible to ambition and achievement, should feel the sense of ethicality and nobility of the legal profession in his bones. We hope, hopefully, there would be apposite response towards duty; the hollowed and honoured duty"
Several Advocate Generals in the country have been accused of wrong doings but alongside those controversial ones we have had some outstanding ones too. J M Thakore, Gujarat's Advocate General since 1960 was India's longest serving Advocate General. He worked under 27 state governments and 13 chief ministers, intersperse with five spells of President's rule. He had the unique and remarkable distinction of holding the post as Advocate General of Gujarat from the day the state was formed till his death, a period of over forty years. His fierce independence, dedication to the profession and unimpeachable conduct ensured that successive governments of widely differing political ideologies continued to have him as the Advocate General.
The late H.M. Seervai, India's outstanding lawyer, jurist and scholar in constitutional law was Advocate General of Maharashtra for 17 long years with great distinction. He achieved an exceptional stature by his inflexible integrity, strong courage and conviction. As Advocate General of Maharashtra from 1957 to 1974, Seervai maintained the high stature as he was not a political appointee and did not consider himself one. Governments came and went but Seervai was not called upon to resign. His total disconnection from politicians and politics was his greatest strength. He dedicatedly defended Government in Court but declined to defend government policies which he felt were against his convictions. Seervai was quite unconcerned of financial rewards in the profession and had contempt for Advocates who prided themselves in having a lucrative practice. Lucrative, according to him meant greed for gain. Once asked if it would not be wrong to take high fees if clients were willing to pay them, Seervai retorted, "If a man was willing to be robbed would you be a thief?"
A Retired Judge of Madras High Court N. V. Balasubramaniam had candidly stated 'It is easier to become a judge of a high court than an Advocate-General as it is difficult to get that post unless one is a qualified and a very meritorious person,'
There is nothing wrong if the Advocate General is flamboyant and better still if he has an abiding interest in spirituality but he should never be a Merchant of Venice.
But how can solved this type of problem
From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net [mailto:indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net] On Behalf Of Poonam Agarwal
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2ype of problem014 12:45 PM
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Cc: Dipak Shah
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] SUPREME COURT CRYING FOR JUSTICE
After 21 long years our court of law acquitted all 7 accused in 1993 surat bomb blast ..... Now all police and other officers who made innocent people accused shall be hanged. what about life of 7 innocent people and thier families ?? is this justice ??? You made life of people hell for 21 long years ?????
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:41 AM, SURESHAN P <sureshandelhi@gmail.com> wrote:
I have seen many such victims in my legal practice,
One poor man lost his son in a Honour killing by known people, Delhi Police blamed some unidentified people, Crime branch had fortified Delhi Police's Story. It took several years for that father to get investigation transferred to CBI. When CBI took investigation all available evidences where either tampered or not traceable. CBI finally got a co-accused to give statement. But CBI had also done mischief by letting elders. Finally three accused were charge sheeted . After 13 years the matter refereed to Juvenile court , two were again sent back to normal court and punished for life . One is still before the juvenile court with confusing date of birth documents. The appeal of the convicted prisoners are pending before High Court. All this years the poor father is fighting for justice without any support from the state machinery, all the time he has seen hostile behavior from the Prosecutors and other govt lawyers.
Another poor father had no whereabouts of his major son , who had been abducted by some people in board day light near palam.. All the call details and the number of the vehicle were proved to the police but no proper investigation. When he filed writ petition seeking CBI investigation a High court judge laughed by saying that " CBI can't take every kind of silly cases" Supreme court also reposed full faith upon Delhi police and thus the petition filed by the father is dismissed. Now this father is being harassed by the police for making allegations against the police in his petition.
This kind of incidents are common and no media will cover it.
No court will show any interest in this kind of cases as the same was not a celebrated case like Arushi etc.
Or it is not brought by a highly paid lawyer like Shnati Bhooshan or Prasanth bhooshan.
This kind of unending stories will be continued for the sake of welfare state
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Dipak Shah <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:
If any body goes to my cases at High Court of Gujarat , one will wonder of Justice and also they were sit in Hon. Supreme Court of India!!!!
Shah D J
On Tuesday, 15 July 2014 9:27 PM, Prasad Vaidya <pbv1968@gmail.com> wrote:
The Judges are sitting as expert in every matter and in every subject. The Supreme Court it self is violating fundamental rights . The matters filed by party in person are heard lastly and matters are listed at the bottm. Right to file writ petition u/a 32 of constitution but party person is compelled to request to court to allow him to file writ petition This is deadly unconstitutional decision.
Supreme Court is protecting corrupt decision of imposing bar examination which is deadly unconstitutional but petition challanging bar exam is kept pending purposefully by Supreme Court and Supreme Court want to see Ad Gopal Surahmanyam as Judge of SCI the person who took unconstitutional decision and acted like dectator.
The High Court judges are not reading notes of arguments and hearing only 10 to 20 % arguments and pasing order in final hearing matter instead of passing judgment. The judges are not knowing that there is no limitation for filing writ petition.
How you can say SCI is crying
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Dr. J. K. Chaudhry <jkchaudhry@gmail.com> wrote:
There are well known cases,where judgement wasNEVER delivered by Supreme Court.
Do you believe?
Devi Lal oath of office in union cabinet.
J.K.Chaudhry
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 25, 2014, at 9:02 AM, Gopalarao Rao <gvgrao33@gmail.com> wrote:It is said that justice delayed is justice denied. There is one case pending in the high court for the last 7 yrs and GOK when the judgement will be issued also whether it will be delivered during my life time ( I am now 81)
Some one from the high court may know my plight.
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 21, 2014, at 10:12 PM, Ravindran P M <raviforjustice@gmail.com> wrote:It is the courts and courts only which are responsible not only for the subversion of the justice delivery system but for the increasing lawlessness and crimes. Just ask how many times the apex court had entertained bail applications of Raja and Kanimozhi? And now they are shamelessly trying to pass on the buck to the Parliament. Why courts, even quasi judicial organisation have been following the bad example of courts and have been only draining the exchequer without delivering even 1 percent of what they are tasked to deliver. The district forum in Palakkad had been adjourning a consumer complaint of a complainant in the adjoining district involving a doctor for years on end. Almost after ten years I sought info on the status of the complaint. I got the info that it is pending. But at the next date for hearing it was dismissed! I complained to the minister for consumer affairs and the chief minister here. Nothing happened, except that in response to the complaint to the CM the President of the Forum said that the stipulation of three months for disposing a complaint is only a guideline and that was it! For details please read my blogs:
Obnoxious functioning of consumer fora/commissions- letter to minister (of 8/1/11) at
Chief MInister's Contact Program-consumer fora at
ACCESS TO JUSTICE-A STAKE HOLDER'S REPORT at
FRAUD IN GOVERNANCE AND REDRESSAL OF PUBLIC GRIEVANCES at
Eight years of right to information: Are those responsible for governance idiots or traitors? at
and more...
regards n bw
ravi
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Forum for Fast Justice <fastjustice@gmail.com> wrote:
SUPREME COURT CRYING FOR JUSTICE
Appex Court appeals to the Parliament for legislating appropriate laws and to the Government for rationalising decision making process for stemming vicious and frivolous cases and appeals being filed. Read the last paras in the Surbroto Roy Sahara's recent Supreme Court Judgement.
(Bhagvanji Raiyani)
Chairman & Managing Trustee
Forum For Fast Justice
"REPORTABLE"
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 57 OF 2014
Subrata Roy Sahara …. Petitioner
versus
Union of India and others …. Respondents
J U D G M E N T
Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.
149. A lot of these hearings consumed this Court's full working day. Hearing of the main case, consumed one full part, of the entire summer vacation (of the Supreme Court) of the year 2012. For the various orders passed by us, including the order dated 31.8.2012 (running into 269 printed pages) and the present order (running into 205 printed pages), substantial Judge hours were consumed. In this country, judicial orders are prepared, beyond Court hours, or on non-working days. It is apparent, that not a hundred, but hundreds of Judge hours, came to be spent in the instant single Sahara Group litigation, just at the hands of the Supreme Court. This abuse of the judicial process, needs to be remedied. We are, therefore of the considered view, that the legislature needs to give a thought, to a very serious malady, which has made strong inroads into the Indian judicial system.
150. The Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted, with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to be evolved, to deter litigants from their compulsive obsession, towards senseless and ill-considered claims. One needs to keep in mind, that in the process of litigation, there is an innocent sufferer on the other side, of every irresponsible and senseless claim. He suffers long drawn anxious periods of nervousness and restlessness, whilst the litigation is pending, without any fault on his part. He pays for the litigation, from out of his savings (or out of his borrowings), worrying that the other side may trick him into defeat, for no fault of his. He spends invaluable time briefing counsel and preparing them for his claim. Time which he should have spent at work, or with his family, is lost, for no fault of his. Should a litigant not be compensated for, what he has lost, for no fault? The suggestion to the legislature is, that a litigant who has succeeded, must be compensated by the one, who has lost. The suggestion to the legislature is to formulate a mechanism, that anyone who initiates and continues a litigation senselessly, pays for the same. It is suggested that the legislature should consider the introduction of a "Code of Compulsory Costs".
151. We should not be taken to have suggested, that the cost of litigation should be enhanced. It is not our suggestion, that Court fee or other litigation related costs, should be raised. Access to justice and related costs, should be as free and as low, as possible. What is sought to be redressed is a habituation, to press illegitimate claims. This practice and pattern is so rampant, that in most cases, disputes which ought to have been settled in no time at all, before the first Court of incidence, are prolonged endlessly, for years and years, and from Court to Court, upto the highest Court.
152. This abuse of the judicial process is not limited to any particular class of litigants. The State and its agencies litigate endlessly upto the highest Court, just because of the lack of responsibility, to take decisions. So much so, that we have started to entertain the impression, that all administrative and executive decision making, are being left to Courts, just for that reason. In private litigation as well, the concerned litigant would continue to approach the higher Court, despite the fact that he had lost in every Court hitherto before. The effort is not to discourage a litigant, in whose perception, his cause is fair and legitimate. The effort is only to introduce consequences, if the litigant's perception was incorrect, and if his cause is found to be, not fair and legitimate, he must pay for the same. In the present setting of the adjudicatory process, a litigant, no matter how irresponsible he is, suffers no consequences. Every litigant, therefore likes to take a chance, even when counsel's advice is otherwise.
153. Does the concerned litigant realize, that the litigant on the other side has had to defend himself, from Court to Court, and has had to incur expenses towards such defence? And there are some litigants who continue to pursue senseless and ill-considered claims, to somehow or the other, defeat the process of law. The present case, is a classic illustration of what we wish to express. Herein the regulating authority has had to suffer litigation from Court to Court, incurring public expense in its defence, against frivolous litigation. Every order was consistently and systematically disobeyed. Every order passed by the SEBI was assailed before the next higher authority, and then before this Court. Even though High Courts have no jurisdiction, in respect of issues regulated by the SEBI Act, some matters were taken to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (before its Lucknow Bench). Every such endeavour resulted in failure, and was also sometimes, accompanied with strictures. Even after the matter had concluded, after the controversy had attained finality, the judicial process is still being abused, for close to two years. A conscious effort on the part of the legislature in this behalf, would serve several purposes. It would, besides everything else, reduce frivolous litigation. When the litigating party understands, that it would have to compensate the party which succeeds, unnecessary litigation will be substantially reduced. At the end of the day, Court time lost is a direct loss to the nation. It is about time, that the legislature should evolve ways and means to curtail this unmindful activity. We are sure, that an eventual determination, one way or the other, would be in the best interest of this country, as also, its countrymen.
…………………………….J.
(K.S. Radhakrishnan)
…………………………….J.
(Jagdish Singh Khehar)
New Delhi;
May 6, 2014.
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
--
Veteran Major P M Ravindran
You may also like to visit:
'Judiciary Watch' at www.vigilonline.com
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
--
http://freedomteam.in/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ftilogo-new-300x183.jpg
P. Sureshan,
Advocate-on-record, Supreme Court Of India,
NLC( India ) Law Office
No. 90, Second Floor , Bank Enclave , Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-92..... Ph: 9818083219,8802797432,01132081075
This message and any attachments are solely for the use of the intended recipients. They may contain privileged and/or confidential information or other information protected from disclosure. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you received this email in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your system.
Thank You.
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Aires Rodrigues
Advocate High Court
C/G-2, Shopping Complex
Ribandar Retreat,
Ribandar – Goa – 403006
Mobile No: 9822684372
Office Tel No: (0832) 2444012
Email: airesrodrigues1@gmail.com
Or
You can also reach me on
Facebook.com/ AiresRodrigues
Twitter@rodrigues_aires
No comments:
Post a Comment