DO WE HAVE TO BUY JUSTICE IN OUR COUNTRY

Fee to Lawyers under Courts as already stated , is a Fee like that of all in other issues. Pleaders of JUSTICE shall not be the Servants of Governments .
Considering general public only, Article 32 and 39 A were provided . There are Judgments Delivered based on LETTERS , TELEGRAM too. Even last month, one of our circle member got Judgment on his letter of urge by S.C. more  

1. Why is it mandatory to pay the advocate fees for seeking justice. It actually means that a person who has been wronged the maximum needs to pay the maximum. This is inversely proportion to justice. Lawyers fees are quite high, not everyone can afford. Lawyers should be directly be paid like the police...

2. Delaying court proceedings are possible when one of the parties has enough money to pay regularly for the appearance fees of the lawyers for a prolonged period of time.

3. There should be an online e-enabled justice system for standardized set of crimes, just like traffic violations. more  

Lawyer Fee is like all other Fee for the minimum institutional costs. Payment also qualify responsibility. It doesnot mean to opt illegal methods through bribing at undue interest whatever the Office, System may be.
Till 87, the Courts were held and lawyers also carried at vested interest even preferring public interest cases by lawyers and, Suomotu cases by the Courts.
AIR 1987 show the long pending cases due to insufficient No. of Courts and, the inadequate No. of Judges. It also enlightened the part of High Courts and the following Direction explains HOW THE JUDICIARY WAS CORNERED WITH SET inability.
[1987] 4 SCC 609 : S.C. laid down the following guidelines for the exercise of the right under Article 32 :- { MOST IMPORTANT }
1.The Scope of Art. 226 is wider than Art.32 . The parties first seek relief in the High Court and should come to the Supreme Court in appal only .
2. Hearing of the case at the level of High Court is more convenient to the parties. It saves lot of time.
3. The High Court has its own tradition. They have eminent Judges, whose capacity should be utilised.
4. Every High Court has a good Bar. There eminent lawyers with wide experience, handle different kind of cases. They know history of every legislation in their Staate.
5. The Supreme Court has no time to decide cases pending before it for the last 10 to 15 years. With the present strength of Judges and will take more than 15 years to dispose of all pending cases .
6. If the cases are filed in the High Court the task of Supreme Court acting as an original court which is a time consuming can be avoided .
7. If cases which may be filed in the High Court are filed in this Court it would affect the initiative of the High Courts . We should preserve the dignity, majesty and efficiency of the High Courts. The taking over by this Court of the work of High Court may undermine the capacity and efficiency of the High Court and should be avoided.
8. The time saved by this Court by not entertaining the cases which may be filed before the High Courts can be utilised to dispose of old matters in which parties are crying for relief .

The way Executive set the Courts where only lawyers have earning opportunities with ' Intellectual Property ' having taken an oath of legal performance which also include counselling the Client on the facts of law and Justice disclose the hidden aspiration of the Politically influenced Executive. Both Courts and Lawyers/Advocates fared well till 90s and became influenced by the way the Rule prevailed in most of the Fields of Operations of both Governance as well as p.a.

As has been observed since beyond a Decade, except some individual personalities of grateful concern in the Pillars of our Constitution, the performance in Governance and p.a. proves the issue of negligence and or yield to the Political Power . more  

An issue with precise is to be publicized for ' Reply by Message ' demanding JUSTICE to Secure lakhs to petition both S.C., and, PRESIDENT. more