Young advocates must volunteer to assist the
litigants who cannot engage the services of a counsel due to lack of means or
awareness, the Supreme Court has said.
Expressing appreciation for a young advocate who
rendered legal aid to a party-in-person, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and
Satish Chandra Sharma said lawyers should render best legal assistance to the
litigant without any expectation in return for their professional services.
"Young advocates joining the bar must volunteer
to assist the litigants who cannot engage the services of a counsel due to lack
of means or awareness whenever an opportunity presents itself. Moreover, they
should render the best legal assistance to the litigant without any expectation
in return for their professional services.
"By these gestures of volunteering to represent
indigent litigants, advocates can collectively make a statement to the society
at large that the legal profession stands for the right to have access to
justice and equality before law, not just in theory but in practice too,"
the bench said.
The top court said such efforts of advocates, though
in an individual capacity but acting towards a common objective of bringing an
amicable quietus to the litigation, would send out a message that counsels are
not hinderances in the process of parties reaching a mutually agreeable
settlement, particularly in labour and matrimonial matters.
"They can also effectively play their parts in
helping the parties end their disputes, and add positively to the alternate
dispute mechanisms like mediation and conciliation.
"These are opportunities to make meaningful
contributions to the society, and as a result the legal profession as a whole
would gain the goodwill of the society in general and indigent litigants in
particular," the bench said.
Referring to the case, the bench said the counsel,
advocate Sanchar Anand, appeared 14 times before this court to represent the
petitioner in two years.
The petitioner, admittedly being a man of limited
means, has not been able to pay a penny to the counsel for his services, it
said.
"The counsel is not even an advocate on the
panel of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, so as to receive some
reasonable remuneration for his time and expenses. Yet, the counsel dedicatedly
appeared before this court during these two years to not just represent the
petitioner, but also to assist this court in reaching a just and proper
conclusion to this case," the bench said.
The apex court said access to justice before the
highest court of the country is not bound by the shackles of lack of financial
resources.
The bench said persons from all classes, etc., who
wish to approach this court with their grievance, must be provided with
necessary assistance by the responsible members of the bar, without increasing
the cost of litigation for the party or unnecessarily delaying the process.
"This is a welcome change from the trend being
witnessed in our court rooms, where the litigants located in far corners of
this country have to shell out humungous sums of money in the name of
professional fees for engagement of top echelons of the legal profession,
particularly when the matters do not progress on a particular day.
"In lieu of their expectations for the
constitutionally guaranteed right to justice at the hands of this court, they
are often handed over a document that reads on top as 'Record of Proceedings'
and which acts as a means of justifying the professional fees, without there
being any substantial relief for the party concerned," the bench said.
"The message that eventually spreads among the
litigant public is that a hearing in this court is available only to those who
have the wherewithal and can withstand the financial pressure arising from
their litigation apart from the uncertainty of the result, and that the doors
of justice may be inaccessible for others who can ill-afford to pay such high
fees to lawyers.
"We must reiterate that this misconception is required to be
broken. The duty to provide ease of access to justice rests upon every member
of the legal profession and the requisite message needs to be disseminated from
the portals and corridors of this court in the first instance in both letter
and spirit," the court said.