Two Faces of Striking Lawyers ...

On 8th Jan 2009, Times of India carried an article that ferrets out Lawyer's greed
as a reason for the strike.

You may read the article at 2009 01 08 Article on TOI Lawyers Strike ... Actual text of the TOI article is reproduced here for posterity after the above link goes stale.

The Article reveals that Lawyers who went on strike wanted to have easy income at the expense of suffering of innocent people. It is just like a doctor making money by unnecessarily prolonging the disease.

The lawyer Dwimurti becomes evident in all their public posturing and indignation against the CrPC amendments. On surface Striking Lawyers claim to be agitated by loss of discretionary powers with the police in making an arrests. TOI believes that Lawyers privately admit their opposition to it because the changed law will reduce bail cases.

Lawyers strike to bail themselves out
NEW DELHI: For all their public posturing and indignation against the
CrPC amendment vesting greater discretionary powers with the police in
making an arrest, lawyers privately admit their opposition to it
because the changed law will reduce bail cases.

Though loathe to come on record, lawyers across various district bar
associations in Delhi which struck work on Wednesday predicted a
drastic fall in bail cases due to the CrPC amendment. Since it gives
greater leeway to an investigating officer (IO) to decide if an arrest
is warranted or not in offences which carry a maximum sentence of
seven years' imprisonment, observers say number of arrests for such
crimes is likely to come down and so will the corresponding bail
matters ending up before courts.

The bar associations, however, have wrapped their grievances in dire
warnings of lawlessness and increased crimes against women, since a
molester can now walk away secure in the knowledge that he might not
be arrested. Still, was going on strike the solution, given that every
judicial authority from the Supreme Court to Delhi High Court has
repeatedly directed lawyers to refrain from this option?

"It isn't a strike on principle and policy,'' says senior lawyer
Kamini Jaiswal, referring to Wednesday's protest. She said it was the
loss of clients due to less bail pleas that was causing heartburn to
most district lawyers, "Litigant had nothing to do with the amendment
but it is he who suffers the most because of such strikes. Even when
SC has termed strike as `gross misconduct' lawyers resort to it, this
is extremely unfortunate. If we take a fee we are dutybound to provide
legal service to our clients,'' she said.

While the bar associations claim the amendment will lead to increase
in crimes like kidnapping, stabbing, forgery etc, lawyers like Ashok
Arora see nothing wrong in the amendment, concluding it will in fact
"help administration of justice''. He added, "Whether bail matters
will be reduced or not shouldn't be concern of any profession. As
lawyers our aim should be to help in administration of justice.''

Even the judges, speaking on condition of anonymity, maintained the
bar striking work at the drop of a hat on every issue was
unacceptable. "In district courts, many lawyers are dependent on
fighting cases for anticipatory or interim bail. Therefore this
amendment has left them fuming,'' added an HC judge familiar with the
workings of lower courts.

It was left to Delhi High Court Bar Association president K C Mittal
to stand by his lower court counterparts and back their demands.
"Amendment does suffer from many defects which will have consequences
like escalation of crime. Giving discretion to police to arrest or not
means there will be no deterrence,' ' Mittal told TOI. When asked if
going on strike was a good way to protest against this change, Mittal
claimed it was being done only to warn the public of what trouble lies
ahead due to the changed CrPC. "How do we raise a point? We keep
shouting, sending representations, letters, etc but no one listens.''


=======
Initial Notification & Inspiration for this blog by: gorky