Experiencing Bombay High Court

My impression of a court and its proceedings were surrounded by the idea presented to me by Indian cinema and television. It was only when I attended a real court session in Bombay High Court during March this year that I figured how skewed my perception was.

The size of the courts was the first thing that struck me. They were way smaller and compact (and were air conditioned too). My picture of the courts being a high security zone turned out to be wrong as well, though I was told that security was often beefed up when high-level cases were heard.

Inside the courtroom I saw that tensions were high, but there seemed to be no hostility between the two lawyers fighting the case. At one instance, I even found them smiling and talking to each other. The judge listened to the prosecution’s case and the defendant’s point of view. But to my surprise, instead of just being a silent umpire who after hearing both arguments gives his decision at the conclusion, the judge would often nudge in between with counter-questions, asking them to justify what they had stated.

There was no “objection milord” or “order order” to be heard. In fact, the judge didn’t possess a gavel at all. Upon inquiring, I was told that the Indian judicial system had done away with the English system of judges holding a gavel long back.

Honestly, that saddened me a little. I guess a gavel would’ve helped greatly in adding some action to seemingly boring court sessions. It’s like them snatching the sole right of a judge to subtly tell a person, or a people inside a courtroom to shut the f*** up. It greatly reduces the action one expects in courts.

Though I must say, a natural calm existed throughout the proceedings in every court session. A lawyer sitting beside me told me that anyone who spoke apart from whom the judge had asked to speak could be held in contempt of court which was a somewhat serious offence.

People sitting in the courtroom spoke in hushed tones and a number of junior lawyers could be seen either taking hand notes or operating their cell phones inside the court room despite a board outside the court clearly asking people to switch their phones off while a court is in session.

In one proceeding, I saw two judges sitting which I was told was a divisional bench. It was interesting to observe that only of the two judges was actively involved in the hearing while the other seemed to continually assist him during the proceedings. I was told by a lawyer that this happens owing to the seniority of one of the judges compared to the other.

The judge looked into papers that were presented to her and after a short proceeding, gave a quick recap of the case and the arguments presented. She pointed out a few flaws in the prosecutions argument and finally said in her verdict that she had no choice but to quash the case, though she was ready to take what he had said on record. When the lawyer tried to press his point, the judge got rather annoyed and said “Don’t waste my time Mr. ###. I do not see anything in this case.” And the dismayed lawyer backed off.

It was a really interesting experience and I must say this that anyone with a valid identity card can go to court and watch a hearing if he/she so wishes to. Apart from a few cases which are held closed-doors, most cases are open to public.

The Bombay High Court building is magnificent and even basic structures like the wash basin stand testimony to its Victorian architecture.

And o yeah, the court building is full of cats. :-)