Why shall advocacy differ with judiciary under common law?
DV Rao Advocates-Hyderabad, (C
(Querist) 20 February 2012
This query is : Resolved
Either the Advocacy or the Judiciary must follow the law and obey the law.
Either Petitioner’s Advocate or the Defendant’s Advocate must follow the law for pray the relief. The rule of practice never says to pray for any relief against the law or to give support to the wrong doers. So, If we analyze the Judgement it shall be support the winning Advocate for maximum of 60% and the defendant Advocate for a minimum of 40%. Other wise it can create the opinion that the defendant Advocate either not following the law or he/she is supporting the wrong doers.
The Judiciary also must follow and obey the law for giving Judgments, Hence the Judiciary must frame the rules on the every petition like as PIL. If the defendant Advocate fail to get a relief of at least 40% according to his prayer, then the Judiciary award him/her with penalty. Because here law is common to all these.
Then, The qualitative legal service can be expected and legal service can reach the poor.The wrong doers also will fear to approach the Court.
Hence, The percentage of crime rate and corruption, Pendency can be controlled in our country.
Sincerely
DVRao,
Practicing Advocate,
Supreme Court of India
