- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
UThis is a question to those in litigation from someone who has just ventured into this field. I am a first-gen lawyer who graduated from a t1 NLU and recently switched from corporate, again a very prominent t1 firm, to litigation.
I experienced and heard that in the Court, the police acts very sincere and even apologetic when unable, whether by choice, pressure, collusion or otherwise, to perform their duty properly but once out of Court, they go back to their old habits. Even if they provide verbal assurances, they are still intentionally reluctant on carrying out investigations and will either cite lack of resources or that only vague, often bogus, circumstantial evidence exists. In the end, you will have to work with these and not be able to file charges in the manner you would ideally want.
Secondly, how do they treat you at stations or in general? I keep hearing from other advocates, even those with good Seniors, that they employ various colours of non-cooperation. It’s not that they will act violently (due to CCTVs these days), but they either refuse to take you seriously or just keep you waiting for several hours, eventually wasting a lot of your time (or not framing the charges in the manner you would want). I also noticed that in many ways, Courts have become more reluctant on listening to Advocates and holding the police or administration accountable in any meaningful way beyond mere words.
Thirdly, the other day I read an old post on Reddit that an advocate did not have the number plate on his vehicle. When stopped by the police, he mentioned that he was going to the Court and the police left him with a smile and a tip, “5000 ka jurmana hai, plate laga lijiyega”. Do these things genuinely happen? Or it’s only on the internet? Because when I asked my senior, he said that unless one knows their superiors themself, they won’t listen, especially if they have committed an offence. And then he added that those who know their superiors won’t intervene in the era of social media for non-serious reasons to avoid tarnishing their own reputation.
Finally, what about societal troubles that happen to you? Say, tenants not vacating flats, etc. Needless to say, you can launch an eviction suit, but such things consume a hell lot of time and resources. In such cases, do you get any benefit outside the Court? An untoward incident of this nature happened with a very senior of mine who said that he lost more than a year’s worth of rent when his Punjabi NRI tenant overstayed for months, and then it took him another several months of time to find a tenant. He is a very respected fellow, yet only had the Court to rely on and no one to enforce. The money could not be collected either as the NRI left the country – and filing more cases would’ve only amounted to more wastage of time and money in terms of opportunity cost.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the profession. But the work in litigation feels a little too unsophisticated at times and makes me wonder if I should again go back to corp. I won’t say that the experience has been terribly unpleasant, but I must still mention that the friction felt immense (switching from corporate).
-
