A Day in a Courtroom
As the case called
out
A 99 Years old
senior advocate
Entered the court
room
To argue a case of
great importance
As the courtroom was
crowded
The persons carrying
him on a stretcher
Took some time in
bringing him
In front of the
judges
Judges looked sadly
Once a great criminal lawyer,
Now lying on a
stretcher
Counsel began his
arguments,
“My Lords, it is
undisputed fact on records
that there is
absolutely no evidence
to show that any of
the eye witnesses
had got eyes!!
The question of
believing them
Does not arise at
all”
“Have you raised
this question
in your cross
examinations?”
The Judge asked
“Defense does not
need to raise
this question in
cross examination
unless prosecution
had asserted in chief examination
that the eye
witnesses had got eyes”
The counsel humbly
submitted
The Judge changed
the track,
“Do you know scope
of Art.136?
Have you ever read
Art.136?”
“Lots of times!
My Lords! lots of
time!
"In fact I had the
privilege
Of explaining scope
of this Article
To many of Your
Lordship’s predecessors.”
The counsel
continued,
“Art.136,226 are pari materia
with Sec.125 of
Cr.P.C.
They provide for
maintenance
For Supreme Court Lawyers'
wife,
children and parents”
The counsel thus
explained the scope
Of Art.136 and
Art.226 and also
the basic object of legal system!
The Judge turned to
brother judge and asked,
“How many lawyers we
have in Supreme Court?”
“11,500” Brother Judge
replied
“How many SLPs
should we hear
to maintain their
families?”
Judge asked
“2,80,000 per annum”
replied brother
judge
“And how many SLPs
should we hear
if we want them to
live a decent life?”
Judge asked again
“4,60,000 per annum”
brother judge calculated.
“Can we not declare 10,000 lawyers as surplus
and direct high
courts and district courts to absorb them?”
the Judge asked
“They won’t be absorb 10,000.”
Brother Judge
explained,
“There is already
scarcity of cases
in District Courts
and High Courts.
The lawyers are
committing suicides
For want of cases!”
The Judge turned to
Court Master
And said, “Issue
Notice in this case”
The Counsel further
argued,
“The question
whether Art.136 and 226
also provide for
maintenance of Supreme Judge’s
wife, children
and parents, is still pending
before 13 Judges Bench of this Hon’ble
Court
“Is that so?”
Judge asked brother
Judge
“I don’t know
I am new here!”
Brother Judge
replied
The Judge turned to
Court Master
And said, “Issue
notice for bail also in this case”
Counsel further
argued,
“Kindly give early
date.
I am suffering from
dementia,
Delirium, arthritis,
And many other
ailments
And my 99 Years
License to Argue
Is about to expire!”
The Judge ordered
early date
The counsel thanked
the judges
For allowing him to
argue from a stretcher
As he could not
stand up on his feet.
“It is al’right.
But you should not
have come.
You are embarrassing
this Court”
The Judge said
Counsel replied,
“All my life I have
used
only ACE method of
arguing”
“What is that?”
asked the judge
Counsel replied,
“Abuse the Judge,
Confuse the Judge,
and
Embarrass the Judge”
The Counsel
explained his
ACE method of
arguing.
Judge turned to
Court Master
And said, “Call the
next matter”
(2)
In the mountains of Tibet
Younger Lama asked
Elder Lama,
“Is it true that
Art.136 and 226 are pari materia
With Sec.125 of
Cr.P.C.?”
“Yes. They are Mokita Pari Materia”
replied elder Lama
“What does word Mokita mean?”
Younger Lama asked
“It means ‘things
which everyone knows
but no one speaks’ ”
replied elder Lama
Haresh Raichura
Note: Inspired after
hearing a very respected and aged senior advocate in a High Court. He
expressed regrets and said he had to come to Court because of pressure from a
relative. I have no disrespect for this senior advocate. The poem is wholly
imaginary.
2. Mokita is New Guinea
3. For More such stories author's book "Tomato Soup for Lawyers and Judges"
3. For More such stories author's book "Tomato Soup for Lawyers and Judges"