LL.M. (Crime & Security Law)
Raksha Shakti University, Gujarat
The BCI said judicial officers not having practical experience as advocates are mostly found to be incapable and inept in handling matters. They have a lack of understanding of the aspirations and expectations of advocates and litigants in the matter of proper and decent behaviour. The BAR council also said that the inexperience at the Bar was one of the primary and major reasons for delays in the disposal of cases in the subordinate judiciary. According to the BCI, Trained and experienced judicial officers can comprehend and dispose of matters at a much faster pace.
In All India Judges Association and Ors. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. (21.03.2002 - SC) : Even fresh law graduates without any practice should be eligible to enter judicial service provided training of one or two years. A bright young law graduate after 3 years of practice finds the judicial service not attractive enough. It has been recommended by the Shetty Commission after taking into consideration the views expressed before it by various authorities, that the need for an applicant to have been an Advocate for at least 3 years should be done away with. After taking all the circumstances hon’ble court accepted this recommendation of the Shetty Commission and the argument of the learned amicus curiae that it should be no longer mandatory for an applicant desirous of entering the judicial service to be an Advocate of at least three years' standing. The Hon’ble court, direct to the High Courts and to the State Governments to amend their rules so as to enable a fresh law graduate who may not even have put in even three years of practice, to be eligible to compete and enter the judicial service. We, however, recommend that a fresh recruit into the judicial service should be imparted with the training of not less than one year, preferably two years.
Anyone selected for judicial services has to undergo training before being posted. What is the purpose of training if experienced advocates are required? Without any doubt, we all know the condition of new advocates nowadays, it is not satisfactory, even it is very difficult to fulfil the basic need. Apart from this, to get enrolled in BAR, a law graduate has to spent more than 20 thousand, and, if we think practically, after investing such amount it is very difficult for new advocates to recover. If an advocate is preparing for judicial services examination it will be very much difficult for him to manage time to study and practice together.
Also, if a student who takes admission in law, generally it takes 5 or 6 years to complete law and if someone is willing to post-graduate in law, it will add 1 or 2 more years in it. So, on an average calculation, it will 6-7 year and after that waiting for more 3 years will add 3 extra years. By adding all these it will come to 9-10 year after 12th. This is the plane calculation, what if someone starts studying law 1 or 2 years after graduation? Also, there is no guarantee that a candidate will crack the judicial services exam in the first attempt. This act may kill our interest in judicial services exam. Every young student needs a job at the earliest, so, why will he wait for 3 years? Even after clearing all the examination procedure, it will be very difficult to get promotion to high court as according to calculation, the candidate will get retired max at the post of the district judge. So, we can say that it is a trick used by the BAR to kept vacant the seat of High Court for themselves.
Also, if a 3-year practitioner at BAR becomes the judge of the same court, it will create more biasness, more unjust and it will also defeat the spirit and soul of the constitution. It will create a strong nexus between the BAR and the judge, so, this practise should be avoided.
Law graduates of every institution whether it is a central university, state university, private university or national law university has to undergo 20-week compulsory internship during there college days which is checked by the dean of the department of the concerned university and after complete verification, we get the degree.
We have strong Judicial Service Examination and Selection Process, the recruitment process for the Civil Judge (Junior Division) is a three-step process which includes preliminary examination, main examination and interview. The preliminary examination is usually in the form of multiple-choice questions on subjects that differ across states (which is not open book examination, as ALL INDIA BAR EXAMINATION is conducted). The main examination stage is of a subjective question and answer format. The number and syllabi of test papers vary across states. Candidates who clear these examinations are then required to sit before an interview panel. An interview can help in choosing competent candidates as judges. Once a candidate clears the examination and interview process, they are inducted into service and then sent for training.
For this training we have State Judicia Academies, the judges were usually trained at the High Court or under District Judges or at government institutes like the judicial academy of the concerned state. As of today, there exists a National Judicial Academy (NJA) in Bhopal which works under the close supervision of the Supreme Court of India and focuses its efforts on providing refresher training to judges across the board. In India, as of now, there are 24 Judicial academies running. These academies are supposed to provide both induction training for new judges as well as refresher training for sitting judges.
The workings of the State Judicial Academies on three parameters:
governance of the academy, faculty strength and quality;
clinical or practical training for new candidates.
The Governance and Faculty at the State Judicial Academies are in Every State Judicial Academy will usually have a governing council or advisory board, usually staffed by High Court judges and in some instances, bureaucrats of the State Government according to the Law Commission report no 117, This model of governance appears to be based on a model proposed by the Chief Justice of India in 1986. According to Law Commission of India, Report no. 117, The curriculum prescribed in training for judges is of court management, system management, law and legal principles, substantive law developments, sentencing discretion, related matters of judicial policy, general orientation. Apart from these theoretical courses, practical training was also prescribed, wherein new judges were expected to sit in court with experienced judges to be trained on civil and criminal procedure. This curriculum is designed by the Chief Justice of India.
“Most of such officers are found impolite and impractical in their behaviour with the Members of the Bar and Litigants. They have a lack of understanding of the aspirations and expectations of Advocates and Litigants in the matter of proper and decent behaviour”. Putting such allegation on the judges without any complaint against any of the newly appointed judge, who are fresh law graduate, if any, then BCI should also present it in court. Putting such allegation over judges is direct encroachment to the judiciary and against the ethics of advocates. The BCI talks about the “expectations of advocates”, it should also be clear by BCI, that what kind of their expectations is. Will they conduct the interview of judges before filing any suit or judges have to touch their feet before pronouncing their judgment? Does BCI allege that they are “impolite and impractical in their behaviour” Do the BCI received any written complaint about politeness and decent behaviour against any of the judges who are fresh law graduate?
This is a complete unethical practice done by BCI. If they want judges to be more polite, more generous, and more decent there are more ways like training, and giving less burden over new judges etc. But just for politeness, decency, generosity and their so-called expectations, why fresh law graduate will suffer.? If they have some problem why don’t they file a complaint against them? After all this, is there any guarantee that the advocate from BAR who become judge will not misbehave?
Lastly, I would like to say that this act of BCI shows their interference in the judiciary for their own hidden purposes. This act will also defeat many dreams and turn many law graduates towards some other field. This will certainly create a vacancy in the judiciary which will also increase burden over the sitting judges and it leads to delay in providing justice as we all know justice delayed is justice denied.
(Views expressed are purely personal and Legal Angles does not take any responsibility of the views of the Author)