Relationship between bar and bench
- 1. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BAR AND BENCH – ROLE OF THE BAR IN DISPOSAL OF CASES BROAD PURPOSE OF BENCH AND BAR: The body of persons which operates the machinery through which justice is administered, composed mainly of the Judges and the Advocates who help them in discharging their difficult duties, has existed and functioned both in ancient and modern times. Its broad purpose throughout has been to realise all those goals which are labelled "Justice" according to the law which has to be administered in a society whether it is ancient or modern, capitalistic or socialistic, feudal or industrial. Concepts of justice, however, have changed vastly in the course of time. And, as between different States in modern times too, Justice, as embodied in the law, has different contents and connotations. Such differences as we find between different States as regards the functions of the Bench and Bar are, I suggest, mainly due to the somewhat differing basic concepts of justice found in the laws of different States. These concepts have been produced and moulded by the operations of complex and interconnected, constantly acting and counter-acting, sets of factors in the course of our histories.1 TWO LAW COMMISSIONS: In this country, at any rate, there has been considerable hard thinking about the basic structure and the operations of our machinery for the administration of justice. An All-India Commission, under the Chairmanship of Mr. M. C. Setalvad, who conferred upon us a great favour by presiding at the sessions of our Seminar at Allahabad, during the Centenary Celebrations of the High Court, produced a voluminous and exhaustive report after three years of collection of information, intensive study, and deliberation. A Law Commission appointed by the Government of Uttar Pradesh had also made its comprehensive study and surveyed the conditions under which Justice is administered in this State. I am sure that we will benefit greatly if we could have access to similar mines of information about their machinery of justice and its operations in other countries.2 CHANGING CONCEPTS: Our concepts of Justice do not consist of a body of eternal, abstract, immutable, unchanging norms, but they will be found to be the products of an interchange of shifting pulls and forces which spring from changing social, political, cultural, and economic conditions.3 New moral values, ultimately translated into law, emerge in the process. Our notions of Justice are relative and results of empirical knowledge of what satisfies certain needs believed to be basic. The satisfaction which these needs demand is only permitted in legally recognised modes. One may mention here that what is legally sanctioned should not be viewed apart from what is morally sound and right. This is the approach of a growing school of legal thought powerfully represented by the English Judge Lord Devlin today. 1 http://www.legalpoint.in/BenchBarRelations.php last visited on 17.11.15 2 http://www.allahabadhighcourt.in/event/RoleoftheBenchandtheBarMHBeg.pdf last visited on 17.11.15. 3 Ibid
- 2. CASE LAWS DEFINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BAR AND BENCH: The opinion of our Supreme Court in the context of Bench- Bar Relations, has been clearly laid down in P.D. Gupta v. Ram Murti and Others4 as follows: "A lawyer owes a duty to be fair not only to his client but also to the court as well as to the opposite party in the conduct of the case. Administration of justice is a stream which has to be kept pure and clean. It has to be kept unpolluted. Administration of justice is not something which concerns the Bench only. It concerns the Bar as well. The Bar is the principal ground for recruiting judges. No body should be able to raise a finger about the conduct of a lawyer. Actually judges and lawyers are complementary to each other. The primary duty of the lawyer is to inform the court as to the law and facts of the case and to aid the court to do justice by arriving at the correct conclusions. Good and strong advocacy by the counsel is necessary for the good administration of justice. Consequently, the counsel must have freedom to present his case fully and properly and should not be interrupted by the judges unless the interruption is necessary." In Mahant Hakumat Rai v. Emperor5 the Lahore High Court had held that "Without failing in respect to Bench, it is the duty of the members of the Bar to assert their just rights to be heard by the tribunal before which they are practising. They should be fearless and independent in the discharge of their duties, and would be perfectly right in protesting against irregular procedure on the part of any judge; and if the advocate is improperly checked or found fault with, he should vindicate the independence of the Bar. He would be perfectly justified in insisting on getting a proper hearing and he would be perfectly right to object to any interruption with the course of his argument such as to disturb him in doing his duty to his client. Plenary powers vested in the Presiding Officer of the Court, apart from the fact that they have rarely been used against members of the legal profession so far, should only be used to vindicate the honour of the court or to satisfy the necessities of public justice and not as a matter of course." It may, however, be noted that the presence of professional etiquette coupled with recognition by judiciary of the importance of an independent Bar, will work together to minimise the possibility of confrontation between the Bench and the Bar. CONCLUSION A free and fearless Bar is not to be preferred to an independent judiciary, nor an independent judiciary to a free Bar. Neither has a primacy over the other. Both are indispensable to a free society. The freedom of the Bar presupposes an independent judiciary through which that freedom may, if necessary, be vindicated. One of the potent means for assuring judges of their independence is responsible, well- behaved, cultured and, learned Bar. Finally, reciprocal adjustment of conduct by the Bench and the Bar is the keystone to the smooth functioning of courts in general interest of the society. 4 AIR 1998 SC 283 5 AIR 1943 Lahore 14.