A remark was made against the advocate that he had refused to open his mouth in a virtual hearing by a Supreme Court bench headed by Justice R F Nariman.
The bench also comprising of Justice Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee said that on 25th August, the mike was one of the Advocate Ankul Raj and the Court requested at least three times for him to speak but he did not respond. According to them, he purposely did not do so because he was waiting for the Senior Advocate.
The bench said that instead of doing such tactics he should have been upfront with the court and should have said that he was waiting for the Senior Advocate.
The Courts are having a problem with the virtual hearing as decorum is not maintained well. Earlier, Orissa HC said that lawyers should not do virtual hearings by sitting inside the vehicle, garden, or allowing their wife to come on the video. A lawyer also attended the virtual hearing in a t-shirt which was not appreciated by the Court.
A lawyer was attending the meeting in the garden and when the Court questioned the same he said that there was a connectivity issue at his residence. The Court believed that to avoid any glitches one should do virtual hearing from his home or temporary place of residence.
In this case, the Court said that they strongly deprecate tactics of such kind and said that the advocates should not take advantage of the non-physical hearing system when it is working on both sides.
The advocate's version was that he kept silent because his case was being considered was not realized by him. Later, a statement of the oath was filed by the advocate stating that he had not engaged any senior advocate on that day.
On this statement, the Bench on Friday expunged all the remarks which were passed against the advocate.