- Apprentice Lawyer
The Supreme Court has taken objection to advocates playing to the gallery and making insinuations against judges by attributing political motives.
The strong observations were made by a Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Vineet Saran in a judgment concerning disciplinary rules framed by Madras High Court.
The Court came down heavily on lawyers who attribute political motives when judges pass orders in politically sensitive cases.
“Whenever any political matter comes to the Court and is decided, either way, political insinuations are attributed by unscrupulous persons/advocates. Such acts are nothing, but an act of denigrating the judiciary itself and destroys the faith of the common man which he reposes in the judicial system. In case of genuine grievance against any judge, the appropriate process is to lodge a complaint to the concerned higher authorities who can take care of the situation and it is impermissible to malign the system itself by attributing political motives and by making false allegations against the judicial system and its functionaries. Judges who are attacked are not supposed to go to press or media to ventilate their point of view.”
Such advocates feel that they are above the Bar Council and they are the only champion of the causes. Terming it as “hunger for cheap publicity”, the Court said that the same is against the noble ideals of the profession.
“Unfortunately, some advocates feel that they are above the Bar Council due to its inaction and they are the only champion of the causes. The hunger for cheap publicity is increasing which is not permitted by the noble ideals cherished by the great doyens of the bar, they have set by their conduct what should be in fact the professional etiquettes and ethics which are not capable of being defined in a narrow compass. The statutory rules prohibit advocates from advertising and in fact to cater to the press/media, distorted versions of the court proceedings is sheer misconduct and contempt of court which has become very common.”
Such acts destroy the faith of common man in judicial system, the Court said.
Read a detailed story on the judgment here.
Read the full text of the judgment below.