Criminal Trident Pack: IPC, CrPC and IEA by Sr. Adv. G.S Shukla and Adv. Raghav Arora
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Guest)

I am having an advocate on rec but can i appear as in person

Respected Gurus , 

Greetings for the day !!

I am having an advocate on record , but I would like to attend as party in peron from now on with out taking No objection from the advocate . can I appear as a party in person from now on and file any petition with out the advocate signature , when ever I want I will include the advocate but can I alone attend and file the petitions with out the signature of the advocate and only with my signature with out taking No objection . Please advice me .

Regards ,

VK 

 



Learning

 16 Replies


(Guest)

Which type of case is and what is your background legally , means experience of cases ? 
See half guidance can lead to disaster and proper guidance can lead to solution 


(Guest)

The question which I asked is related to Subjective Act involved? 
There is some procedure in some case before attending In Person . That too you may have to do 
 

R.Ramachandran (Advocate)     13 January 2018

If you  engage an Advocate - only he can argue the matter before the court on your behalf.  

Having engaged an Advocate, if you prefer to argue the case as party in person, you can do so (without NOC from the Advocate) by informing the Court accordingly.

However, you cannot ask the Advocate to appear some times, and argue in person at some time.  Either you do the case as 'Party in person' or through an Advocate.  There is no hybrid permissible.

Rishi kumar   13 January 2018

Venkat,

i have an advocate. She has represented me all this while in court. There is no rift between my advocate and me. When it came to the cross examination of the complainant I was not in agreement with what the the advocate was going to ask. So I firmly said that I am going to cross her. She agreed. And she also said she will file a vakalatnama again after this. On the day of crossing when I said I don't have an advocate and I will cross, judge agreed but asked me to give an affidavit. I typed an affidavit saying the lawyer herself retired from my case and I am going to cross. No sign of the lawyer is required.  I got the necessary advises from this forum only.

yes Venkat, you can reappoint him if you want. But only that if you are confident, you continue, the judge should not think that you are over smart. Because once upon a time he must also have bee a lawyer. But if your lawyer fully agrees with you why should there be any problem. Ramachandra has advised

 

balas (Chartered)     13 January 2018

Mr. Venkat,

 

Your advocate has to first withdraw the Vakalatnama (NOC) and then you can proceed to go as party in person.

With an advocate on record, although on certain occassion court may be liberal in allowing you to be heard, but eventually the Adv on Rec representation will be final. Apart, the opposing counsel has the right to and will object to your way of representation i.e both you and counsel.

Irrespective of any Act, this is the Court Practice and Procedure.

Bala Srini FCA., LL.B.

 

Nitish Banka (lawyer)     13 January 2018

You may argue in person by notifing the court. It is advisable to have an advocate to hav ebest results. Because as an  advocate we know art of arguments.

Adv. Nitish Banka

Practicing Advcate Supreme Court of India

nitish@lexspeak.in


(Guest)

Thanks Every one who responded in this matter , I have filed petition u/s 44 of evidence act as an IA in the main OP ,  since my advocate not feeling on 14th Dec 2017 well I have filed this petition  as an IA , the family court given the number this IA . I have given the notice to other party as order by the court , now the other party advocate raising the objection regarding the maintability of the petition stating that  since I have filed a this  petition  as a party in peron as already enguage an advocate but my concern here is I have sign the petition and write my advocate name but with out the signature of the advocate , I felt like I have right to file the petition  as advocates not mantaroy in family matters  they act like amicus curie only . should advocate signature mandotory if I file the petition as party in person or either one's signature is enough .

please clarify me .

Regards,

VK 

 


(Guest)

Thanks Every one who responded in this matter , I have filed petition u/s 44 of evidence act as an IA in the main OP ,  since my advocate not feeling on 14th Dec 2017 well I have filed this petition  as an IA , the family court given the number this IA . I have given the notice to other party as order by the court , now the other party advocate raising the objection regarding the maintability of the petition stating that  since I have filed a this  petition  as a party in peron as already enguage an advocate but my concern here is I have sign the petition and write my advocate name but with out the signature of the advocate , I felt like I have right to file the petition  as advocates not mantaroy in family matters  they act like amicus curie only . should advocate signature mandotory if I file the petition as party in person or either one's signature is enough .

please clarify me .

Regards,

VK 

 


(Guest)

Thanks Every one who responded in this matter , I have filed petition u/s 44 of evidence act as an IA in the main OP ,  since my advocate not feeling on 14th Dec 2017 well I have filed this petition  as an IA , the family court given the number this IA . I have given the notice to other party as order by the court , now the other party advocate raising the objection regarding the maintability of the petition stating that  since I have filed a this  petition  as a party in peron as already enguage an advocate but my concern here is I have sign the petition and write my advocate name but with out the signature of the advocate , I felt like I have right to file the petition  as advocates not mantaroy in family matters  they act like amicus curie only . should advocate signature mandotory if I file the petition as party in person or either one's signature is enough .

please clarify me .

Regards,

VK 

 


(Guest)

Respected Gurus,

just adding some more points to my previous reply , if the presiding officer felt its mandotory for signature of advocate in the petition filed by the party in person , he can not give the number and has to raise an objection before giving the number .

until and unless the opponenent advocate raise this objection , court should know the mainability of the petition whether they has to accept this petition or not ??!!! make sense am i ryt ??

 

Regards,

VK 

Advocate Friend (Assistant Manager - Legal)     13 January 2018

Bhai Venkat,

You seem to been a victim of your opponents tactic to fall prey to your emotions. Your questions and actions also are in line with your opponents advocate strategy. 

To take objections and make the litigant suffer through the process of law is an art and thats what lawyers get paid for (also at times in not making their client suffer the process of law).

There is a proverb 

'A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client' 

This proverb is based on the opinion, probably first expressed by a lawyer, that self-representation in court is likely to end badly. Ref: https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/a-man-who-is-his-own-lawyer-has-a-fool-for-a-client.html

This adage has two distinct aspects. The first addresses a principle in American law that allows an individual to represent himself or herself in most judicial proceedings, such as criminal or civil trials. This is called acting pro se, whcih is Latin meaning for oneself.

While this is a right afforded a party (civil case) or defendant (criminal case), legal rules are complex and arcane, and the task can be challenging for one trained in the law, let alone one who has no formal legal education or experience. In this case, the phrase means

This is tough stuff. You would be foolish if you try to represent yourself.

Because of this, many judges, especially in criminal cases, will require that the person representing himself or herself have a shadow counsel available to assist. The shadow counsel does not lead in the arguments or examinations, but is on call as will try to guide the pro se defendant or party informally.

The second aspect of this saying covers the circumstance where someone who is a lawyer tries to represent himself or herself. Most lawyers and judges believe that the same rules apply as if the defendant or party were a lay person. In fact, some would argue that a lawyer representing his or her own interest is even more foolish than a lay person.

A lawyer may have the arrogant view that she or he knows the law and is an excellent advocate. Right or wrong in that analysis, as an involved party, the lawyer is unlikely to be as objective about the case as an independent counsel. That involvement, almost always emotionally charged, may distort the handling of the case, usually to the lawyer's detriment. Judges will often insist on shadow counsel even when the pro se defendant is a lawyer.

Many (especially lawyers) would say

A man (or woman) who is his (her) own lawyer has a fool for his client.

A lawyer who represents himself (herself) has a client who is an even bigger fool.

Ref: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/121264/a-man-who-is-his-own-lawyer-has-a-fool-for-his-client

 

Well, that said I would let you find it for yourself how it goes and credit or discount the proverb with you own experience.

Do let the forum know of your experience.

 

Kumar Doab (FIN)     13 January 2018

You can benefit from the discussions in the thread.


(Guest)

You already filed vakalat. Your advocate already put your story before court.

Now he telling your story?

You telling you want to tell your story? So both are contradictory.

You tell something. He tell something. Court will dismiss your petition.

Take my word for it.

Either do it yourself. Fire lawyer.  Or let him do.  two ppl inserting in one whole? 


(Guest)

You already filed vakalat. Your advocate already put your story before court.

Now he telling your story?

You telling you want to tell your story? So both are contradictory.

You tell something. He tell something. Court will dismiss your petition.

Take my word for it.

Either do it yourself. Fire lawyer.  Or let him do.  two ppl inserting in one whole? 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query