Supreme Court judge B V Nagarathna on Saturday lamented that the legal system is bogged down by pendency, delays and rising costs, and asked the bar to change its mindset, rethink its role and speak in a singular voice to sustain the justice dispensation system.
Justice Nagarathna, who was speaking at the 13th convocation of National Law University at Delhi, stressed that when a bar council does not earn the respect of its members, it is not a good sign for the legal profession.
Bar councils must introspect on their role and importance in upholding professional ethics, morality and professional competence and it is time for members of the bar to introspect on their duties in seeking justice for the distressed litigant and for sustaining democracy in the country, she said.
“The lawyers of this country are the torchbearers of the values of our Constitution. Any lapse or errors of the bar will have a deep impact on our political and civic life. Hence, their importance in our society.
“I humbly remind every member of the Bar to change their mindset and endure to work for their clients as a public service, lest they lose their relevance in the future to come. That would be disastrous for our system of dispensation of justice and for preserving the rule of law in our country.” Justice Nagarathna said that the bar must use its knowledge and judgment in the service of the rule of law.
“As the legal system in India is bogged down by pendency, delays, rising costs and uncertainty, the Bar in India must rise and speak in a singular voice as to how it could sustain the system of justice dispensation in India,” she said.
Describing lawyers as the “safety valves” of democracies, Justice Nagarathna said the independence of the Bar is not an entitlement given to lawyers for their own benefit.
It exists because a constitutional democracy requires a body of professionals who can advise, argue, challenge and represent without having to ask the permission of the State, the market or even their own clients before doing so, she said.
The bar must rethink its usefulness to the litigant public, its role in safeguarding our democracy and in upholding the majesty of courts of law and its indispensability in upholding justice and the rule of law, she said and reminded that the legal profession played an important role in the national movement and in the making of the Constitution.
Justice Nagarathna also spoke about the changing nature of the legal profession and said that as lawyers of the 21st century, the young lawyers were entering a profession that must constantly adapt and respond to a changing reality.
“The velocity of change around us is unprecedented — technological advancements, environmental crises, social upheavals, geopolitical shifts, and transformations in the way we live, work, and think. These are not theoretical conundrums.
“They go to the heart of what kind of society we want to live in — and what role the law should play in shaping it. We need thinkers who can build bridges between the past and the future, between tradition and innovation, between legality and legitimacy,” she said.
Delhi High Court Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya conferred degrees to those passing out from the NLU. Besides him, several other judges of the high court and Chancellor of NLU Delhi Prof (Dr) G S Bajpai were also present at the convocation.
On the use of technology, Justice Nagarathna said it is impossible to automate human judgment even with artificial intelligence and added that some questions cannot be answered by a bare knowledge of law.
“They require judgment, communication, strategy and an understanding of people. And these are precisely the skills that ADR (alternative dispute resolution) develops,” she said.
The judge cautioned lawyers appearing before courts against relying on fake judgments generated through artificial intelligence, saying, “Don’t fall prey to hallucination.” Justice Nagarathna also emphasised the importance of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and said there had been a discernible shift from traditional litigation towards alternative mechanisms, though litigation remained authoritative and courts remained the cornerstone of the justice system.
She said litigation faced procedural complexity, delay, costs and its inherently adversarial character. Arbitration, mediation and conciliation were therefore increasingly becoming components of the justice system.
