Pairokar

Much has been written, discussed and debated about the conduct of judges and advocates. However, we many times find the cases of indiscretion by judges and advocates as well; in and outside the courtrooms. Sometimes it is deliberate but more often than not, it because of misunderstanding and ignorance. There is an Advocate act, which defines and demarcates the duties, rights and limitations of the advocates. Bar Council of India and the Bar Councils of the states derive their strengths and powers from the Advocate Act, 1961. Thus the Bar Council of India and Bar Councils of states are the statutory creations or bodies. On the other hand, judges are governed by the service rules and the code of conduct as formulated by the High Courts from time to time. Even the judges of the Supreme Court of India have framed the code of conduct for themselves regarding the declaration of assets etc. The maintenance of dignity and the decorum, however, largely depends on the particular judge. As far as

Some journalists appear to be gripped with the virus, which commands them to become from news provider to newsmaker, that too, not through assiduous efforts but by their cheap and abominable deeds. Thanks to deep and pervasive reach of the media such journalists do get wide publicity, which serves to their perverted desires and goals. It is a welcome evolution indeed that journalism has metamorphosed from ‘Mission to ‘Profession’. Objectivity becomes the easy causality in missionary journalism. Even today it can be witnessed in the politically or religiously indoctrinated newspapers or magazines. For example, nobody accepts objectivity from the ‘People’s Democracy’, ‘New Age’, ‘Christian Times’, ‘Radiance’, ‘Organiser’, ‘Panchjanya’, or ‘Desabhimani’. These newspapers and magazines purvey certain facts and comments, which reflect to their political or religious lines. Preponderance of missionary zeal is essential in such type of journalism. Most of the newspapers or magazines in India,