Journalism of Courage
Premium

Lawyer appears in online hearing in vest, draws HC judge’s ire

Hearing an anticipatory bail plea for one Lalaram on Friday, Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma said that “learned counsel for the petitioner was contacted through video conferencing and he was found to be wearing Baniyan.

Sudarshan TV, Sudarshan TV case, Sudarshan TV program case, Supreme Court, India news, Indian Express This court has already observed that during this pandemic where court functioning is being done through video conferencing, lawyers must appear in proper uniform.” (Representational Image)
Advertisement

The Jaipur bench of Rajasthan High Court adjourned a hearing through video conferencing after a counsel for the petitioner allegedly appeared in a ‘baniyan (vest)’ before the court.

Hearing an anticipatory bail plea for one Lalaram on Friday, Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma said that “learned counsel for the petitioner was contacted through video conferencing and he was found to be wearing Baniyan. This court has already observed that during this pandemic where court functioning is being done through video conferencing, lawyers must appear in proper uniform.”

Lalaram was being represented by advocate Ravindra Kumar Paliwal, 35, in a case against the former pertaining to Narcotics, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Pulling up the advocate, the Court said, “Even through video conferencing decorum of the court is required to be maintained. The Advocates Act provides for lawyers to wear uniform while pleading case for their clients. Keeping in view that the petitioner’s counsel was not in proper uniform, this matter is adjourned,” Justice Sharma said.

Following the lockdown, the Rajasthan High Court has been hearing matters through video conferencing. The hearings are facilitated through the ‘Jitsi Meet’ application, which can be downloaded in mobile phones from android playstore or apple store.

Advocate Paliwal, however, told The Indian Express that it was not him in the video. “I had two cases listed on Friday and I was in my formal attire between 11 am and 1 pm and ready for the hearing. But there was no call or text or any sort of communication by the High Court to me,” he said, and claimed that it was a case of miscommunication, “where someone else may have connected to the hearing.” He said he will file a modification application against the order when the High Court reopens. The court has now listed the matter for May 5, 2020.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Tags:
Edition
Install the Express App for
a better experience
Featured
Trending Topics
News
Multimedia
Follow Us
Express PremiumIn Kerala local polls: First woman IPS, a porotta maker and a movie inspiration
X