Sometimes a short conversation with a wise person is enough to change one's perceptions. This happened with me yesterday. To talk about bad things of any institution is easy and tasteful. But to look at it with balanced view is not within power of everyone.
The Background
The Senior Advocates of Supreme Court who charge few lakhs rupees for 10 minute discussion are not easily accessible. They are seen talking within their own circle or they are seen moving alone, mulling over some important issue to be argued in court. They are the first choice of foreign companies as well of rich litigants of India.
Fortunately for me, I found one such top Senior Advocate standing alone and waiting for his case which was about to be called out in some court.
I saw a small window of opportunity to seek his advice on my desire to write on my blog how Supreme Court has changed in last 20 years and to write how judges before 1990 were as good as Gods who treated even post cards as writ petitions.
What followed was a brief conversation which collapsed all my negative views about Supreme Court Institution to which I was also a tiny part. My respect for Supreme Court rose very high in those few minutes of conversation.
GIST OF WHAT HE SAID
I hope that perhaps, your perceptions may also change after reading what he said. I have therefore written here points from what he told me.
1) It is not good to treat judges as Gods. They are just human beings like us. They no more need to treat post cards as writ petitions. The pre 1990 years were different. No informations were available to them. Now everything is in news. They are themselves taking Suo Motto actions on their own whenever they think they can make difference.
2) The news media should never report what judges say in court during arguments. A judge says something and news media reports, "Supreme Court Said..... ". This is wrong. These are just momentary impulses of a judge, provoked from what is being argued or what they see in case. This does not mean that the judge will decide case in that way. When he starts dictating judgement he states each word which is judicious. The media should only report what is said by Judge in Judgement.
Then he gave an example. A Judge asked, "What is 2G and 3G?". The next day national media printed it in such a way that it looked as if "Judges in Supreme Court are dumb and they do not know meaning of 2G and 3G."
What the Judges wanted to know was what these abbreviations mean for the facts of case.
Abbreviations means different things to different persons. For example, abbreviation AA may mean something or nothing to you. But for an army man, AA means Army Act.
The media is only interested in sensationalising. This often damages one party or other party in the case. This should not been.
3) You want to compare today's Supreme Court Judges with Judges who were here 20 years ago. It is good. It is good that you are writing on blog to educate general public. But do it in a balanced way.
The challenges which judges today are facing are enormous. All the legal machinery they had developed in so many years, have suddenly become outdated and obsolete. With old machinery they are fighting new arena of legal battles which no one had foreseen 20 years ago.
Now situations have become so complicated that every action has legal consequence.
If you tweet, retweet or Like a Facebook post, it can have legal consequences. Do you know they are now asked to decide challenges of "Clouding Wars" ?
"Clouding wars? What are they?". I really had no idea. This was news to me.
He explained, whatever you write on computer and internet uploads and get somewhere in "Clouds", "Sky Drives" or such many other spaces. A person's only protection is password. If someone gets access, his whole work, life secrets, his business and everything is destroyed. A person's whole data on his computer goes away in seconds.
These are some of the many challenges which Supreme Court Judges are facing. With old machineries are expected to fight new crimes and new challenges.
Stunned
For some moments, I was virtually stunned and stumped. I had never thought about Supreme Court in this way.
This senior advocate is among the top Senior Advocates in Supreme Court. He is often engaged by international companies. I am not free to mention his name. This short conversation changed my many negative views. I hope it will make some difference in your mind too.
Haresh Raichura
The Background
The Senior Advocates of Supreme Court who charge few lakhs rupees for 10 minute discussion are not easily accessible. They are seen talking within their own circle or they are seen moving alone, mulling over some important issue to be argued in court. They are the first choice of foreign companies as well of rich litigants of India.
Fortunately for me, I found one such top Senior Advocate standing alone and waiting for his case which was about to be called out in some court.
I saw a small window of opportunity to seek his advice on my desire to write on my blog how Supreme Court has changed in last 20 years and to write how judges before 1990 were as good as Gods who treated even post cards as writ petitions.
What followed was a brief conversation which collapsed all my negative views about Supreme Court Institution to which I was also a tiny part. My respect for Supreme Court rose very high in those few minutes of conversation.
GIST OF WHAT HE SAID
I hope that perhaps, your perceptions may also change after reading what he said. I have therefore written here points from what he told me.
1) It is not good to treat judges as Gods. They are just human beings like us. They no more need to treat post cards as writ petitions. The pre 1990 years were different. No informations were available to them. Now everything is in news. They are themselves taking Suo Motto actions on their own whenever they think they can make difference.
2) The news media should never report what judges say in court during arguments. A judge says something and news media reports, "Supreme Court Said..... ". This is wrong. These are just momentary impulses of a judge, provoked from what is being argued or what they see in case. This does not mean that the judge will decide case in that way. When he starts dictating judgement he states each word which is judicious. The media should only report what is said by Judge in Judgement.
Then he gave an example. A Judge asked, "What is 2G and 3G?". The next day national media printed it in such a way that it looked as if "Judges in Supreme Court are dumb and they do not know meaning of 2G and 3G."
What the Judges wanted to know was what these abbreviations mean for the facts of case.
Abbreviations means different things to different persons. For example, abbreviation AA may mean something or nothing to you. But for an army man, AA means Army Act.
The media is only interested in sensationalising. This often damages one party or other party in the case. This should not been.
3) You want to compare today's Supreme Court Judges with Judges who were here 20 years ago. It is good. It is good that you are writing on blog to educate general public. But do it in a balanced way.
The challenges which judges today are facing are enormous. All the legal machinery they had developed in so many years, have suddenly become outdated and obsolete. With old machinery they are fighting new arena of legal battles which no one had foreseen 20 years ago.
Now situations have become so complicated that every action has legal consequence.
If you tweet, retweet or Like a Facebook post, it can have legal consequences. Do you know they are now asked to decide challenges of "Clouding Wars" ?
"Clouding wars? What are they?". I really had no idea. This was news to me.
He explained, whatever you write on computer and internet uploads and get somewhere in "Clouds", "Sky Drives" or such many other spaces. A person's only protection is password. If someone gets access, his whole work, life secrets, his business and everything is destroyed. A person's whole data on his computer goes away in seconds.
These are some of the many challenges which Supreme Court Judges are facing. With old machineries are expected to fight new crimes and new challenges.
Stunned
For some moments, I was virtually stunned and stumped. I had never thought about Supreme Court in this way.
This senior advocate is among the top Senior Advocates in Supreme Court. He is often engaged by international companies. I am not free to mention his name. This short conversation changed my many negative views. I hope it will make some difference in your mind too.
Haresh Raichura
