Can a non-lawyer appear in a court of law to plead a case? Or can a case ask a person who is not an advocate to appear in court? In this article, detailed information is being given on these topics.
law and order
Section 30 of the Advocates Act states that any advocate whose name is included in the list of the State shall be deemed to be in any court, including the Supreme Court, by any tribunal or person who is legally authorized to take evidence. the right to practice before or before any other authority or person and such advocate is permitted by or under any law to practice for the time being. Section 33, while reiterating this right, states that no person shall be permitted to practice before any court or authority, unless he is registered as an advocate. Section 29 states that an advocate is the only recognized person who has the right to practice law.
Section 32, however, empowers any court, authority or person to allow a person who is not registered as an advocate under this Act to appear before him or her in a particular case. Is .
Non-lawyers may appear if court permits
The Supreme Court in Harishankar Rastogi Vs Girdhari SharmaThis question has been answered in AIR 1978 SC 1019 case. In this decision, the Supreme Court said –
“A private person who is not a lawyer, who does not have the right to appear in the court and to appear on behalf of any party, has to take the prior permission of the court and for this the party has to take the initiative. It is up to the court to allow it or not. It may also happen that the court may, after allowing it, withdraw it midway if it feels that the representative is doing some sleepy act. Information about the person concerned, his relationship, the reason for the permission to take the service of a private person and other circumstances should be gathered before allowing or denying it.”
Thus Section 2(q) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (CrPC) in which an advocate may, by definition, be any person other than a person authorized by law to practice law in any court, if he is permitted by the order of the court to attend a particular case. is deployed.
Justice VR Krishna Iyer said in this regard
“Even if so, does it not depend on the party, who for some reason cannot present his case properly, to seek the help of another person instead? Rejecting this request may be an outright denial of justice in certain cases, especially in a country with illiteracy and poverty, while the judicial process is of a very advanced nature. That is why it is taken care of in legislative policy and such requirements are met.
Section 302, 303 and 304 of CrPC This reflects the policies of the legislature. I do not think that in this court we should completely stop the arrangement of representation of any person other than the party in case the lawyer is not appearing for that party. The comprehensive program for free legal services is in a way a serious responsibility of the state if the rule of law is to be given more importance. Till then the parties can appear (in the court) through their lawyer and if they are not available, they can choose a friend for this.
This other person cannot be one who habitually appears in court as a representative of either party, in which case he would be professionally violating the restrictions under the Advocates Act. I can’t allow him to do that. Nevertheless, it is up to the party to a case to choose a non-lawyer to represent him in a particular case. Practicing a profession, representing a friend or relative on some occasion or in a case or on some occasions is an entirely different matter. In the present case, representation has been sought through a non-lawyer.
It is quite clear that no person is an advocate, cannot claim his right to forcibly enter the court and cannot claim to cross-examine anyone. Considering the situation and taking into account a number of factors, this court may allow such unprofessional representation. This is in line with the policies of the CPC (I mean criminal cases here) as stated in section 2(q).
By definition, a person other than a person authorized by law to practice law in a court of law can be any person if he is appointed with the permission of the court to attend a particular case. The power of this Court to regulate the audience has been exercised in the spirit of Section 2(q).”
Earlier this year, the Madras High Court relied on a ruling that the court can ask any person who is not registered as an advocate to present his views before the court. Justice A Ananda Venkatesh, while dismissing the custody of Nakkiran Gopal, observed that there was no harm in summoning senior journalist N Ram and seeking his advice.
An agent cannot be an advocate for a party in the trial of a criminal case.
TC Mathai & Ors vs District & Sessions Judge (1999) in 3 SCC 614 case It was told that no agent can become an advocate of a party in the trial of a criminal case unless the party has obtained the permission of the court for this. The judgment of the Madras High Court was cited in the case of M Krishnammal Vs T Balasubramania Pillai.
Justice KT Thomas, appearing for the court, said
“Section 2 of the Power of Attorney Act cannot disregard a special provision of any law which requires that a person is required to do a work for himself. When it is required by the Code that the accused must appear in court, then if his power of attorney appears in the court in lieu of him, then the order of the court cannot be said to have been complied with. It is a different matter whether a party should be allowed to appear through his lawyer. The Magistrate is empowered under Chapter XVI of the Code to issue summons or warrants to the accused to appear in court.
Section 205 of the Code empowers the magistrate not to ask the accused to appear before the court in person and if he thinks so, to allow his lawyer to represent him. Section 273 provides for the right of the court to record evidence in the presence of the accused’s counsel if the accused is exempted from appearance in court. But under no circumstances can the holder of a power of attorney be allowed to represent the accused. Therefore, the contention of the appellant on the ground of power of attorney is of no consequence in this case.
Jimmy Jehangir Madan Vs Bolly Cariappa Hindley (Dead) (2004) 12 SCC 509 It was pointed out in the case that under both the rules of CrPC, the power of attorney holder can be permitted to represent the party connected with it, provided permission has been taken to do so and the court has given such permission. But if such permission is not sought through the person connected with it, which means that in terms of section 205 of CrPC, the offender and in terms of section 302 any party who has the power to carry on the prosecution, it is clearly – It is clearly stated that the holder of power of attorney cannot be permitted to represent the person involved in the proceeding.
Earlier this year, a single bench of the Calcutta High Court held that only an advocate registered under the Advocates Act would have the right to advocate a case in any court of law. Taking note of the appeal against this, the Bench observed that in the case of a close relative, the Court may, under its prerogative, order the holder of the power of attorney to address the Court if the Court considers that the person appearing in the Court on behalf of the petitioner The person is well versed in the law, actual events and can address the court and help in this case.
The right to practice is different from the right to appear in court
The right to practice gives an advocate the right to practice the profession of law before all courts, tribunals, authorities, etc. But the right to appear in a case by order of the court is a stigmatization of the right of practice to an advocate. Although, we agree with the view held by different High Courts that the holder of the Power of Attorney does not have the right to address the Court, but in our opinion there is no close relative to allow the holder of the Power of Attorney to appear before the Court. Court has the right.
Bar Council of India Vs AK Balaji AIR 2018 SC 1382 in 2018 In a decision given, it was told that foreign law firms cannot open their offices in India. The Supreme Court said that the practice of law does not only mean appearing in court, but it also includes giving such advice which is legal, drafting a law, participating in legal debate meetings etc.
Chapters of the Advocates Act 4 It has been told that only registered advocates in the Bar Council can practice law. Others may appear in the Court only with the permission of this Court before which the trial of the case is pending.
Section of Advocates Act 45
It is necessary to state that under section 45 of the Advocates Act, if any person who is not entitled to practice in the court under the Advocates Act, that person practices in the court, then such person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months. can. In 2011, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, in its judgment in Madupu Harinarayan v. 1st Additional District Judge Kesha, citing this rule, ordered the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh to file a case against a person who appeared on behalf of a party in respect of GPA. Appeared as such when he was not allowed to practice in any court.
In this article we have told you Can a person who is not an advocate represent a case in court? Know in detail about what the law says Granted, if you have any question related to this article, then you can ask through comment, we will respect your response.