Party in Person (PIP) : How to fight your own case

Adv. Dr Puneet Agrawal

 (हिन्दी मे पढ़ने के लिए translate tab मे भाषा हिन्दी चुने )

Provision for standing Party in Person (PIP) is for people who wish to represent themselves in court. One does not need to be represented by a lawyer. One can represent oneself. There are provisions for fighting one’s own case in the Advocate’s Act, the Constitution of India, Cr.P.C., and the CPC.

 As advocacy is a skill and court craft is a unique learning process, fighting a case as PIP is not at all easy unless one is fully trained and supported through expert advice at all levels of the trial. With experience and a PAN India observation and queries raised at many forums by enthusiastic PIP candidates. Certain common queries can be pointed out easily. There are several types of categories of questions that can be listed here which seem to  trouble a litigant who is willing to appear PIP in the court of trial :

 

A commonly found state of mind, overwhelming thoughts, agendas, passion, enthusiasm, and force of a litigant who aspires to stand as PIP:

 

·         I am learned and educated and can well defend my case

·         There are no good lawyers

·         Lawyers do not give time nor attention to the case

·         I know my case and facts better than anyone else

·         Lawyers only absorb money, I can save a huge amount

·         I can do LLB and be a lawyer myself

·         I will learn the needed law from Google, everything is available there

·         I have men’s right groups helping me and promoting me for PIP

·         I have done no wrong so nothing will harm me in false cases against me

·         This country is full of corrupt officials, and I will manage the officers in the court

·         I have a friend who is a lawyer, he will help me in the trial

·         There are many litigants in the past who have stood PIP and won the case.

·         I have read many judgements of HCs and SC and I will get favourable orders.

·         Judiciary is biased against men and I won't mind going to jail if they don’t listen to my pleas and arguments, but I will add to the cause of Men’s Rights.

·         I will tear off the opponent party with my questions and lies that they have brought up in the court of law.

·         I am not a lawyer hence the Judge has to give me extra chances to defend myself and overlook my procedural mistakes

·         Drafting is easy, I have so many samples with me from fellow litigants and Google

·         I will file several counter cases against the opposite party

·         Perjury and defamation are my most powerful weapons

·         I have confidence, energy, and faith in myself.

·         I will leave my job and fight my case; how will a bankrupted person pay maintenance!

·         Court ethics and mannerisms are not mandatory for a PIP candidate

 

(There is no harm in being passionate and enthusiastic, but it cannot be equated with the professional skills needed in the court of trial. Informed choices have to be made. I will deal with each of the above points in detail in the coming series of articles over PIP.)

 

Basic questions related to enabling provisions of a litigant as PIP: 

 

·         What are the legal exceptions and restrictions for the PIP candidates?

·         How are PIP rules different for the Lower Courts and that of the HC and the SC of India?

·         How are state-specific HC rules for PIP that makes a difference?

·         What is Central Govt.’s The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and relevant State rules and regulations and how it affects the PIP candidature of an aspiring litigant?

·         What is the role of the court’s discretion in allowing a PIP litigant?

·         Who else can appear in a court other than an advocate and a litigant? What is the role of a power of attorney holder?

 

 

 Questions related to the capacity of the litigant to stand as PIP

 

·         Who should take risk of standing PIP? Can every litigant be able to do so?

·         What level of legal and behavioural competencies are required in the course of the trial, and who can sustain them?

·         What is an alternative-non-PIP approach to tackle the case effectively?

 

 Questions related to Procedural and Substantive law

 

·         What are court procedures that are in the books?

·         What are traditionally set patterns of the court procedures not in books?

·         How does court discretion affect your mindset and preparation?

·         How to tackle instant questions asked by the court

·         Difference in Civil and Criminal trials, quasi-criminal and summary trials

·         Cross-Examination nuances

·         Prosecution pressures and procrastination

·         Inability to grasp HC procedures, protocol and the rules

·         Alternate reliefs, counter-case

·         Interlocutory, interim and intermediary orders and issues with revisions and appeals

·         Undermining Corroboration and Circumstantial evidence

·         Proper role of mediation

·         Burden of Proof

·         Transfer of cases

 

Issues that often arise with the PIP litigants

 

·         Anger, overconfidence, aggression

·         Impatience, conflicts

·         Contempt of Court, unparliamentary language,

·         Irrelevant facts and arguments

·         State of fix

·         No immediate remedy

·         Lost in “Want of law”

·         Found hunting judgements

·         “What to do next” syndrome

·         Disappointment

·         Lack of support from clerical staff

·         Information gap

·         Frequent complaints of judicial officers

·         Legalese issues

·         Courtroom language

·         Drafting and pleading errors

·         Argumentation latches

·         Over- generalization

·         Taking Evidence Act for granted

·         Caught in conflict of laws and law of precedents

·         Unable to unlearn the internet propagandist approach

·         Unable to deal with the unexpected

·         Deciding Jurisdiction and court-fees

·         Being too bookish for courts to adapt

·         Applying one formula in various cases emerging from same transaction

·         Unaware of what is winning a case vs fighting a case

·         Delay tactics vs expedite trial matrix

·         Going overboard

·         Considering your opponent as your enemy

 

 

Questions related to court dynamics

 

·         Limitations of a PIP defendant

·         Lack of coordination

·         Lack of proper implementation of Higher Court orders

·         Court surpassing jurisdiction

·         Court jumping over stages in a trial

·         Court striking-out defense

·         Court curtailing privileges and comfort related to Right to defense

·         Directly issuing NBWs

·         Bench formally supporting the “victim justice” and the prosecution

 

 Some common legal dilemmas for PIP

 

·         Various related myths that are impediments

·         Private counsel taking over the trail

·         Frequent prosecution absence

·         Long dates

·         No expedite hearing despite orders

·         Cross-examination on the same day of Examination in chief

·         Witnesses not appearing

·         Interim maintenances

·         High Court delays in giving stay or interim orders

·         Anticipatory and regular bails when in custody or in the apprehension of arrest

·         Judicial officer not taking facts or documents on record

·         No time given for submissions

·         Ignorance of the law is no excuse

·         Reverse burden of proof

·         Judicial activism

·         Unable to get true copies of certain documents

·         Unable to exhibit certain documents

·         Documents are not read by the court during the appreciation of evidence

·         Electronic evidence not admitted

 

 These are some of the very basic questions that a PIP candidate needs to find answers to before jumping into action. There are several more complicated situations, legal demands and dilemmas that one shall face in the course of the trial. The ongoing court-room demands constantly put a litigant in a state of fix due to 3 major concerns:

 

1.    What is the appropriate answer and practically applicable solution to the specific, immediate/ gradual need of a legal issue or problem in the trial?

2.    Who is going to give an expert and reliable solution to it?   

3.    Will that source be consistently be available upholding a sense of professional responsibility?

 

 

Catering to all such needs of a PIP litigant we have launched a blended learning training and supervision program for the PIP aspirants and other proactive litigants who want to.

We will provide:

 

·         A basic orientation towards understanding the needs of a trial in general and matrimonial litigation in particular.

·         An orientation towards needful in a PIP scenario

·         Best possible suggestion about what type of approach one should apply as per given facts on a case to case basic

·         A minute analysis of the cases and giving an outline of the approach

·         A specialized monitoring/supervision/suggestions over all the cases for better performance either as PIP or to the local counsel.

 

 Contact us for taking up the PIP training and details.