By Adv Akshay Kshirsagar on 22nd November 2022
Bar and Bench are distinct entities with the shared purpose of dispensing justice in society.
The origin of the term bar is in England, where it was used to distinguish lawyers from court officers. It is a group of lawyers having licenses to practise law in court and also have registration with the state bar council.
Simply put, Bar is the location where advocates take their seats in the courtroom. The Bench is the location in the courtroom where judges take their seats. It distinguishes terms between judges and lawyers.
The term “Bar” can refer to all attorneys having the licence to practise in the courts, in any given state.
A lawyer must be fair not just to his client, but also to the court and the opposing side. Justice administration is a stream that needs to be pure and clear. It must remain unpolluted.
While Bar refers to all members of the legal profession, “bench” refers to all the judges together. It also refers to the most important element of the court while the judges are sitting in their official capacity.
1. Rules for how lawyers should act and what they should do.
2. Set the rules that its disciplinary committee and the disciplinary committees of each State Bar Council have to follow;
3. To safeguard the rights, privileges and interests of advocates;
4. Promote and support law reform;
5. Deal with and dispose of any matter which may be referred to it by a State Bar Council;
6. Exercise general supervision and control over the state bar council;
7. Promote legal education and lay down standards of legal education in consultation with the Universities in India imparting legal education and the State Bar Councils.
6. Recognize Universities whose degree in law shall be a qualification for enrolment for an advocate for that purpose to visit and inspects Universities, or direct the State Bar Councils to visit and inspect Universities for this purpose;
8. Also, Conduct seminars and organise talks on legal topics by eminent jurists and publish journals and papers of legal interest;
9. Organize legal aid for the poor;
10. Recognize on a reciprocal basis foreign qualifications in law obtained outside India for the purpose of admission as an advocate in India;
11. Manage and invest the funds of the Bar Council;
Provide for the election of its members who shall run the Bar Councils.
12. Perform all other functions conferred on it or under this Act;
13. Do all other things necessary for discharging the aforesaid functions;
14. Bar Council of India may constitute one or more funds in a prescribed manner. (a) giving financial assistance to organize welfare schemes for indigents, disabled or other advocates. (b) giving legal aid or advice in accordance with the rule made on this behalf; (c) establishing law libraries.
15. The Bar Council of India can also receive grants, donations, and gifts for any of these purposes.
Lawyers play a crucial role in the administration of justice. The Profession itself necessitates the maintenance of strong ethical standards. As an officer of the Court, a lawyer’s primary obligation is to the Court, his professional standards, and the public.
Given that a lawyer’s primary duty is to aid the Court in dispensing justice, members of the Bar cannot exhibit dubious morals or seek to profit from litigation.
Lawyers must remember that they are co-administrators of justice alongside judges.
It would be detrimental to democracy and the rule of law if lawyers failed to do their duties correctly. “Law is not a commerce, nor are briefed merchandise.” As a Court official, an advocate is responsible for ensuring the Court’s efficient operation.
He must revive the distressed individual and cannot take advantage of the helplessness of innocent plaintiffs. In appropriate circumstances, a deliberate and callous disdain for the client’s interests may be considered conduct unbecoming of a lawyer.
As a Court officer, an Advocate is responsible for ensuring the Court’s operations run smoothly. Lawyers and judges are equal partners in the administration of justice.
The administration of justice is a sacrosanct role of the judicial institutions or the individuals tasked with that arduous duty, and the principle of judicial review has been proclaimed a component of the Constitution’s fundamental structure.
If anything has the effect of impairing or impeding the quality of administration of justice, either because of a lack of knowledge or proper qualification on the part of those involved in the process of justice dispensation.
Or because they are not properly certified by the Bar Council as stipulated in the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Rules made thereunder, it will affect the administration of justice. Thus the rights of litigants who are before the courts.
No attorney or litigant may intimidate the court or defame the presiding officer in order to obtain a favorable ruling. If such actions were authorized, judges would be unable to perform their duties freely and impartially, and the administration of justice and the Rule of Law would suffer as a result. Judges need to render decisions impartially and without fear or favor.
Attorneys and litigants should not terrify or intimidate judges in order to obtain the orders they desire. This is crucial, and no civilised system of justice administration can enable it.
lawyers cannot use language in the pleadings or during oral arguments that is either impertinent or unparliamentary and tend to interfere with the administration of justice and diminish the Court’s dignity and the majesty of the law.
A litigant cannot have ‘forum choice,’ and every sixth attempt to “forum shop” must be quashed with a hard hand. Nonetheless, it is of the utmost significance to keep in mind that judges must function as unbiased arbitrators and evaluate matters objectively, without any personal bias or prejudice.
A judge must never compromise his judicial position. This is crucial for maintaining the institution’s integrity and public confidence.
The credibility of this institution is contingent upon the fairness and impartiality of all Judges. For the fair administration of justice, it is of paramount importance that judicial powers be exercised impartially and within the limits of the law. Always keep in mind that not only must justice be done, but it must also be seen to be done.
The purpose of contempt safeguards is not to shield any particular judge, but rather to preserve the dignity and decorum of the courts and to sustain the grandeur of the law. Judges and courts are not overly sensitive to legitimate and fair criticism of their decisions.
Section 35 of the Advocates Act of 1961 authorizes State Bar Councils to bring misconduct complaints against Advocates to the Disciplinary Committee. Section 36 also grants similar powers to the Bar Council of India, which is also the appellate body for sanctions imposed by the State Bar Councils. Upon conviction, the Bar Council may suspend or disqualify the Advocate from practice before any court or authority in India.
There is a legal presumption that an attorney knows the law, but there is no such presumption that a judge should know the law. A judge is simply require to weigh all sides of an argument offered to him.
A judge must be impartial, fair, and unbiased, as well as follow the Constitution and the laws of the state in which he or she presides. Refrain from passing judgement until all evidence has been heard.
The Judge is the linchpin of the entirely legal system.
Advocates ask judges to permit them to develop their argument further, even if it is a new issue for admission and the judge has previously perused it. Obviously, some Judges listen carefully even if they know there is no merit to the case. But others are so impatient that the case gets a dismiss before an attorney can even speak.
Advocates desire that judges keep their minds open until the conclusion of the case and not close them with predetermined preconceptions. Numerous attorneys feel this in a variety of cases.
However, there is no harm in changing one’s mind even at the eleventh hour if there is a reason to evaluate the issue. It is usually preferable for a just adjudication procedure to have an open mind.
Advocates want and truly desire equal treatment with all members of the Bar/profession when addressing the courts, regardless of their standing and rank as senior counsel/advocate. Junior members of the Bar are not envious of the status of senior counsel/advocates, as they have the utmost regard for them and realise that senior counsel/advocates have earned it by pure hard work and talent, but they do resent the special treatment they receive from a particular Bench.
Judges also ensure that proceedings are in accordance with court procedures and regulations governing admissible evidence.
These guidelines do more than assure the smooth operation of court proceedings; they also protect the rights of individuals before the court and promote justice. A judge will guarantee that both parties have an equal opportunity to present their case and will make a decision that is independent and impartial.
A judge’s character and behaviour must be laudable, and he must always possess personal and intellectual integrity. A judge should always be aware of the most recent developments and modifications to the law.
The area where the judges sit is the bench, whereas the area where the lawyers sit in the bar.
A good working relationship between judges and lawyers is crucial to maintaining the public’s trust in the judicial system and ensuring that cases resolve quickly.
Advocates play a crucial role in the administration of justice, comparable to that of judges. Together, they are responsible for enforcing the law in the courtroom. For Judges to make a fair ruling in a case, they need the support of Advocates. The time it takes to provide justice and the cost of obtaining justice can be effective if judges and lawyers get along well.
There need to be positive traits and reciprocal duties on both sides for this partnership to flourish. There is more to the administration of justice than the mere presence of a judge on the Bench.
The mutual respect between the Bar and the Bench is vital to the maintenance of the professional relationships between them. Justices and attorneys need to always have each other’s backs. It is generally that judges are part of the bar and the two professions have the same culture.
The connection between the bar and the bench will be amicable. However, because of the nature of the work that must be done, Advocates and Judges will engage in conversation, which can be at times humorous, frequently contentious, and rarely severe. A lawyer’s scandalous action brings discredit on the entire system of justice and undermines its basic foundation.
Whatever the Court’s ruling, an Advocate’s attitude toward the Court should be one of utmost respect. Advocates Since the presiding Judge is responsible for protecting the respectability of the judicial system as a whole, he should not let his personal feelings regarding the court’s legitimacy influence his behaviour. Also, the Judiciary has an obligation to treat members of the Bar with respect and do everything it can to advance the profession’s highest standards.
There are two types of contempt of court, depending on whether the offending behavior is by a lawyer or a judge. The use of derogatory language, threats of transfer or removal, an overly casual approach, and a challenge to the judge’s power to ask questions, are all examples of conduct that is unacceptable.
As a result, this behavior constitutes Contempt of Court. So By punishing those who show disrespect for the Court, we can ensure that the Administration of Justice continues.