Bilaspur: In one of the recent hearing sessions, Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha was shocked when he realized there were five signatures on a vakalatnama in a case.
This happened when one of the advocates wanted more time to present arguments. The subject or matter in question was one where a Single Bench had given a judgement, and a petition was made to the Division Bench, headed by the Chief Justice.
This week, the Division Bench dismissed a batch of petitions filed by the apex body of Dalits, represented by Antaradhyani Yadav of Surajpur district, who had moved the Division Bench to challenge the verdict passed by the Single Bench. When the hearing was on, one of the five lawyers who represented the petitioners applied for additional time to argue.
The above request was not palatable to Chief Justice Sinha, who observed that the Division Bench had anticipated the case. They are improper, he stated, because one was seeking adjournments at last instead of arguing their cases. During the proceeding, when the advocate said that the counsel who was supposed to argue the case was not available, the Chief Justice resolved to look into the case record.
Surprised him was the circumstance that five different advocates executed the vakalatnama on behalf of the petitioners. The Chief Justice probed to know why the absence of a single advocate is enough to make them apply for adjournment while four were empowered to fund the petitioners.
In this regard, he opined that the lack of advocates during hearings contributes tremendously to cases of delayed hearings. According to the records of the Supreme Court, there are more than 46000 cases in the state that have not proceeded due to the absence of advocates during the proceedings.
Noting the seriousness of the issue, the Division Bench has referred the matter to the Bar Council of India (BCI). The Bench called on the BCI to set and provide guidelines and standards for advocates practicing in the court. Such measures were pointed out by the Chief Justice to decrease the pendency of the cases for the efficient nature of courts.
Join our whatsapp group for Latest updates