SUPREME COURT DEPRECATES PRACTICE OF LITIGANT ENGAGING NEW LAWYER TO REARGUE CASE AFTER COURT EXPRESSED DISSATISFACTIONON MERITS

The Supreme Court in the case Pintu Madanmohan Mondal v. State of West Bengal & Ors observed and has criticized a litigant who, through a newly engaged lawyer, tried to reargue a case despite the Court having earlier expressed dissatisfaction with the merits of the case after hearing the arguments but allowed the lawyers for seeking further instructions.

- 

The bench comprising of Justice Abhay S Oka, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Augustine George Masih was hearing the present matter.

The bench in the case observed that it being not the case that the learned senior counsel appearing before the court argued the matter and who took time to take instructions are not available. There are cases and cases when the said court is not satisfied about the merits, instead of dismissing the petitions, the said court grant time to the counsel to take instructions and the members of the Bar very well know what instructions the advocates are supposed to take. Therefore, This court does not endorse this practice adopted by the petitioner. Even if due to exigencies, a new counsel is engaged, he ought to state the instructions received. The counsel cannot re-argue the case.

The bench headed by Justice Oka in the case observed and has pulled up the advocate on record for the petitioner.