Adv. Dr Puneet Agrawal
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment