Skip to main content

With cell phone, in jocund company

What do you make of red coloured walls in court premises? Some of the walls inside our High Court premises have been painted red recently. Bureaucratic lethargy is also conjured in the mind as preserved through red walls. If you are walking past the musty files strewn about in the corridors, waiting to be re- arranged in the steel shelves, you will realise, the mix of colour and smell give you rather a glum feeling. Courts are rather un-amusing places. Your own perception of what is just and what result that you can obtain for your client put you through an unenviable ordeal, when you enter the court halls. A judge knitting his eye brows to get at the truth through the facts and law enmeshed in a cumbersome snare of arguments is weighed down to hold a tough countenance.

However, cell phones have contributed their own bit to enliven the lives of all persons, notably lawyers in courts. Lawyers with cell phones, who are walking in the corridors or standing under the trees or sitting in the lively benches outside court halls, present themselves in various moods, depending on the persons that are holding the conversations at the other side. The ‘switch off cell phone’ warnings on the court doors, notwithstanding, they ring, tweet, hoot, sing, drum at all times through the court proceedings. Reactions to them vary from among the judges, court staff, lawyers and litigants.

A lawyer speeding out of the court hall is probably choking the instrument with his hands inside the coat pockets, when his fingers are not nimble enough to silence it by pressing the correct button. The judge looks up to the sound of disturbance but he normally lets it pass. Litigants face a rather stiff chase. Chopkidars trot out speedily to catch the culprit and snatches the instrument to hand it over to the court officer. One thing is certain, the ringing cell phone is an object of revulsion, its possessor, a guileless character at that moment. It requires therefore enormous resourcefulness to appreciate a moment of levity in the rather mundane, humourless forays within the court halls.

Recently, when the cell phone rang and not knowing where the sound was coming through, every one in the court hall looked up in embarrassment to spot the offender speeding out. The judge looked up too, leaned on his large table and queried with a twinkle in his eyes, ‘why does that person not have the latest ringing tone’? The lawyers just loved the interlude and broke into laughter. Yet another time, when the cell phone rang, the chopkidar, sitting near the judge facing the lawyers, sprang to his feet to trace the source of sound. He soon realised that it emanated not from the direction opposite to him but came from behind. He turned round and just then the judge slightly lifted himself from seat and pulled out the gadget from his pant pockets to switch it off! Now, the lawyers did not smile back; they exchanged glances with their friends with glistening eyes, by suppressed laughter! Some time ago, when an officer from the registry had been called to receive some stiff warning for some act of indiscretion reflected through some docket entry, he was standing near the judge’s table, when his cell phone rang. He dropped the file that he was clutching at and pulled out the cursed instrument to switch it off. The lawyers froze but the judge just smiled, asked him to leave the hall and see him in his chambers during the lunch recess!

SMSes are less intrusive and still lesser disturbance-prone. SMS jokes are a new genre and they also add spice to relieve the court room dreariness. They transport a whole lot of hilarious material, traversing through distant continents. They are meant to be discarded instantaneously or forwarded only to your most intimate friend! They shall not be, as a rule, allowed to be read from your gadget. Even when the recipient is standing next to you, the practice is to send it to his number for him to read it from his own cell. A joke through SMS is a personal possession!

Spontaneous laughter says Arthur Koestler in his book, ‘The Act of Creation’, is produced by the co-ordinated contraction of fifteen facial muscles in a stereotyped pattern and accompanied by altered breathing. Its manifestation may vary from smile to broad grin to the facial contortions typical of the loud laughter. Civilised laughter is rarely quite spontaneous. Amusement can be feigned or suppressed; to a faint involuntary response, we may add at will a discreet chuckle or a leonine roar; and habit formation soon crystallizes these reflex-plus-pretense amalgams into characteristic properties of a person. Whatever the type of person you are, carry humour with you always. Let the civility of the occasion, time and place dictate the decibels of that expression!

Comments

drawat123 said…
When Technology enters some where its first effects top lastly to whom its really requires

Popular posts from this blog

In hot pursuit of truth

Introduction Look at a world where the assumptions are: All lawyers lie; auditors fudge accounts; civil contractors use substandard materials; corporate hospitals loot; doctors are negligent; politicians plunder; shopkeepers cheat. The boast however is, ’Only I am different. I do not do any wrong but others do.’ If we must limit our analysis to what pervades our courts in our search for truth and justice, we will come by a shocking revelation that very few believe truth is attainable. The judicial system is not engineered to securing truth at all times. The provisions for reviews before the same court and appeals and revisions in higher forums are attempts to substitute what the first court found as true or just to something of what you believe to be true or just. If the appellate court reverses the judgment on a question of fact, it, in effect, finds error in what the lower court found as true. If a further appeal restores the first court's finding, it means that the 1st...

RIGHT TO PRIVACY

  First use of the expression Warren and Brandeis wrote more than a century back that privacy is the "right to be let alone", and focused on protecting individuals. This approach was a response to then technological developments of the time, such as photography, and sensationalist journalism, also known as   yellow journalism. A right to privacy is also explicitly stated under Article 12 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. " No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks." Was privacy right known to ancient Bharat? When Puttaswamy traces most of the issues identified as protecting right to privacy to the West, there is also an attempt to indigenise the concept, which in the same judgment Justice Chandrachud incidentally refers to an article published in ...

Constitution Day Address at Law College, VIT University

Seventy ago on November 26, the Constitution of India was adopted by the Constituent Assembly. The Preamble to the Constitution of India bears testimony to the historic occasion. However, the Constitution was only partially adopted that day. The full adoption came two months later on January 26, 1950 - the day is celebrated as the Republic Day to mark the anniversary of occasion. Post Emergency, after the then Janata party also failed to hold on to the government at the centre, there were strong waves of introspection of the situation that gave place to emergency. The flagrant violations of human rights at that time, the ADM Jabalpur decision during emergency when the Court infamously said that there was no right to life at all when there was emergency in operation, the memory of supersession of judges and when A.N.Ray was appointed as CJI because three other judges who delivered the Kesavanada verdict were found as not towing the government's policies and the obvious affront t...