B V Acharya, Senior Advocate and former Advocate General for Karnataka. Bangalore
The controversy among two sections of lawyers regarding physical hearing and virtual hearing is continuing and the Supreme Court Advocates Association has minced no words when its President stated “we have no choice but to take agitational approach”. Shockingly he told the Judges of the Supreme Court “if your Lordships feel that the Supreme Court is above the law, we will have to take law in our own hands”. This he appears to have said as reaction when the Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the Bar Association challenging the SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) providing for a hybrid procedure as a temporary solution to the problem created by the two sections of the Bar taking dramatically opposite stand.
The response of the President of the Bar as seen from his above utterances is both unfortunate and disappointing. It is unthinkable that the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association could use expressions such as “lawyers taking law into their hands”, “judges of the Supreme Court feel that they are above law”, merely because the Supreme Court declined to entertain the writ petition filed by the Association challenging the Standard Operating Procedure dealing with hybrid method, making it clear that they cannot deal with it on the judicial side and that the matter has to be sorted out between the Bench and the Bar on the administrative side. In the circumstances, agitational approach proposed by the President cannot be appreciated or commended.
In every system there will be some advantages as also disadvantages. One has to weigh them and find a satisfactory solution. One of the grounds urged by the Delhi lawyers to discontinue virtual hearing is that lawyers from outside Delhi are able to appear even before Supreme Court, offering stiff competition to the local lawyers. This could hardly be a justification for their demand. On the other hand, one should appreciate the fact that the practice of virtual hearing all over the country during pandemic has resulted in emergence of single Bar in the whole country when a lawyer from any place could appear in any part of the country. This is a great advantage to anyone including lawyers from Delhi who have been now appearing before the High Courts and other courts all over the country. Healthy competition among lawyers practicing in different parts of the country should not be seen as an evil to be avoided.
In fact, virtual hearing has advanced the case of litigants in having easy access to justice without the problem of distance. The mode of hybrid system adopted by the Supreme Court appears to be the best solution to the problem. Evidently we may note that this system has been in vogue in Karnataka High Court, since some time and the same is working satisfactorily. If there are any mistakes or errors in the Standing Operating Procedure of the Supreme Court, same could be corrected by mutual discussions. A candle light march may not be necessary for the purpose.
The judiciary is today facing multiple problems. In such a situation, it is absolutely essential that there is harmony and mutual understanding between the Bench and the Bar. Any differences should be sorted out by mutual discussions and deliberations. This will be in the best interest of the judiciary and the country.
B V Acharya, Senior Advocate and former Advocate General for Karnataka. Bangalore
Daksha Legal 