Pairokar

Article 348 of the constitution of India says that the languages of the Supreme Court and every High Court will be English. However, Article 348 (4) further provides that the Governor of a State may, with the previous consent of the President authorise the use of Hindi language or any other regional language used for any official purposes. Taking recourse to this proviso, some High Courts have allowed to make the arguments etc. in Hindi but the decisions to my knowledge, are delivered in English alone. In my opinion the use of English should be completely dispensed with. This is right or wrong is an altogether separate issue but it underlines the importance of English language in all courts — right from the Apex Court down to the trial courts. Since the principle of stare decicis is applicable for the judicial discipline; the working knowledge of English language assumes much importance. In Common Law system, the precedent is one of the main sources of the law. Hence, every ad

The immediate cause of this writing is the controversy that is going on in the Supreme Court about the need and relevance of the AOR system. I am of the opinion that every advocate must have passed some sort of examination conducted by the particular court to practice there. But it should be not on the pattern of the Advocate-on-Record Examination as is conducted by the Supreme Court of India. It may be interesting to know that there are three types of practicing Advocates in the Supreme Court. The first category is of Senior Advocates, who have been designated by either the High Courts or the Supreme Court of India. Many questions have been raised about the designation of 'Senior Advocates' by different High Courts. Many senior advocates have been able to wangle this designation more by foul means than fair. The level of their arguments in the courts proves the point. But In the Supreme Court also there are two