PPT of Practical Training Subject
PPT of Practical Training Subject
ASSESSMENT
Viva-voce: 10 Marks
TOTAL: 25 MARKS
6
EXTERNAL EXAMINATION
Total Marks 75
• Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. He must have the knowledge of the law for which
he is dealing in a case. We all know that the law is like an ocean; no one can be the master
of law. But an advocate should know about the law used in the case in which he is dealing
for.
• Advocates should have knowledge, attitude and skill while dealing with the case. To get
the knowledge of the law and understand the law he should have given sufficient time for
that.
• No advocate can win the case without sufficient knowledge of the law. He must have
given the time for the case so that he could deal perfectly with that case and increase his
chance to win the case. Our law is not static, it keeps changing with the need of society
every time to solve the various new problems of the society. An advocate should update
himself with these new laws. Even if a lawyer was good enough to deal with all the cases
in the previous time, and now he does not stay up to date with new laws, he will face
difficulties while dealing with the case in the present time. There is no way other than
hard work.
• Being a professional lawyer in the field of law, a lawyer should have wit and a sense of humour. It is
the humour that keeps us calm and active. A person without a sense of humour will fight the case
with anger which isn’t good for providing justice. Judges also like the advocates and witnesses
which help them to provide justice in a case.
• The wit is a necessary lamp to lighten the darkness of advocacy. A wit helps the advocates to
stay focused on his work and reduce the workload so that he can remain relaxed. It
automatically removes the mental strain of an advocate so that he can think beyond the limits of
his mind.
• A well-prepared speech by an advocate in front of the Judge will not always work. An advocate has
to answer the questions of a Judge and that question will check the wit and presence of mind of a
lawyer. The questions asked by judges check the intelligence and knowledge of advocates related
to the case.
• It happens many times that an advocate forgets to produce something in the court or fails to
answer some questions in the court. At that time, it is the wit of an advocate which helps him to
fill that gap.
• The lamp of judgement means the deep study of the present case and
then make an informed opinion for that case. An advocate should think
from two sides of the case because it will help him to understand the
consequences of the case. By understanding the case from both sides the
advocates knows the merits and demerits of that case. It helps him to
anticipate the problems and tackle the same with his other lamps of
advocacy.
• A good advocate knows what will be the consequences after representing a
witness in court. He should be aware of what questions can be asked by the
judges and the opposite party after the witness. And he should be ready to
counter these arguments and questions from the opposite party and judges
of the case as well.
• Fellowship is one of the most important lamps of advocacy. An advocate must carry
fellowship with his colleagues. When an advocate takes the case and argues, he argues
against an opposite advocate. But it does not make them opposite to each other, they are
just making arguments for the sake of justice only. After finishing the argument in the
court hall, the advocate should respect his opposite advocate. Even while doing an
argument in court, an advocate should respect his opposite lawyer as well. The reason is,
it is not the fight between both of them but it is the fight for justice only.
• After the judgement of the caught in a case, even if an advocate lost the case, he should
respect the advocate who wins the case. If an advocate starts fighting with each and
every advocate who is opposing him in the case, he will make all the advocates his enemy
which is not professional ethics.
• A case must not bother his friendly relationship with other advocates. An advocate
should while referring to the opposite advocate use the term as a learned friend or
learned counsel.
• Constitution
• The Bar Council of India consists of members elected from each State
Bar Council, the Attorney General of India, and the Solicitor General
of India who is an ex-officio member. The members from the State
Bar Councils are elected for a period of five years.
• The Council elects its own Chairman and Vice-Chairman for a period
of two years from among its members.
• In February 2023, the Central government sought to change guidelines for the designation of senior
lawyers.
• These guidelines were issued by the Supreme Court in the aftermath of its 2017 ruling in the case
of ‘Indira Jaising vs. Union of India’.
• The designation guidelines for lawyers are based on a point-based system, which awarded 40%
weightage to publications, personality, and suitability gauged through the interview.
• The Centre argued that this system is subjective, ineffective, and dilutes the esteem and dignity of
the honour being conferred traditionally.
• It pointed to the rampant circulation of bogus and sham journals where people can publish their
articles without any academic evaluation of the contents and quality of the articles.
• The Centre also sought to reinstate the rule of a simple majority by a secret ballot, where the judges
can express their views about the suitability of any candidate without any embarrassment.
• The existing guidelines discouraged the system of voting by secret ballot, except in cases where it was
unavoidable.
• Professional negligence
• Misappropriation
Module No. 4 :
PUNCTUALITY
ACCURACY OF DOCUMENTS
Prof. Viraj Deshpande, ABACL 76
Role of bench :
JUDICIAL RESPECT
PATIENT HEARING
IMPARTIALITY
AVOIDANCE OF INTERFERENCE
Prof. Viraj Deshpande, ABACL 77
Conclusion
If both the Bar and the Bench are fully conversant with their duties
as set out in their respective Rules of Conduct and actually comply
with the Rules, there will be little room for disharmony.
On the contrary, there will be much greater cooperation, respect and
understanding between the two arms which in turn will promote due
and orderly administration of justice and lead to speedier
dispensation of justice in the country.
Any default by one side negatively impacts and impedes the work of
the other side.
• As a result, Justice Keshote wrote a letter to inform the Chief Justice of the Allahabad
High Court about this mishappening, which the then-acting Chief Justice VK Krishna
forwarded to the Chief Justice of India through a letter on 05.04.1994.
Prashant Bhushan Case
• In Re: Prashant Bhushan & Anr., ( 2020) the Supreme Court
held Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan guilty of Contempt. It
held the 2 tweets by the Senior Advocate to be in Contempt of
court because it scandalised the authority of the court.
• The court relied on the judgement given in Brahma Prakash
Sharma And Others vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh (1953) in
which it ruled that scandalising the court is when there is
an attack on an individual judge or the court as a whole with or
without reference to particular cases, casting unwarranted and
defamatory aspersions on the character of the judges. This
according to the court is necessary because it creates distrust in
the mind of the people and “impairs the confidence of people in
the courts which is of prime importance