Dear trainee judges, Please tell me what is your job profile.
What do you mean by being a judge?
What would it mean had not you been a judge?
How many of you feel that you are here by chance?
What would it mean had you landed in a military academy?
ow many of you feel that you are unfit for military or defence services?
Please tell me why you are here and not there?
What is that extra or peculiar that is found only in a judge?
What is that withou which  a judge will not be a judge?
Through training what has to be injected in your mind, body and soul?
Is it extended college education?
Is it law lessons refreshed?
Why a judge is required?
Why the society invests so lavishly on Judges and Judiciary?
What is meant by court campus?
Whether court cammpus are necessarily to be associated with police and jail?
What minimum would you expect from a court campus, a court, its functionaries and a judge as a common man?
Are you ready to deliver the same to the common man now that you are a judge?
Whether system will allow you to deliver to the common man what they expect ?
If your answer is No, what are the constraints and who is responsible for the bottleneck?
According to you  what is fine with our justice delivery system?
What makes you feel proud that yoy are a judge?
Why you are sad that you are a Judge?
As per your perception what ails our system?
Now that you are in, how do you plan to contribute.
Be ready 
to plan, 
schedule 
and prepare a time table 
when you are there as a judge. No matter what comes in ,never give up to prepare a time table though every time time table fails? This much, you all can inject out of your own efforts in the system for the system and this one point agenda will change everything including your history.

मानव जीवन अतुल्य है, प्रकृति की अनन्यतम रचना है, कृति है, प्रत्येक व्यक्ति समाज की धरोहर है। मानव जीवन जन्म से मृत्यु तक, पूरी यात्राके दौरान मानवीय गरिमा का हकदार है।
मानव जीवन की यात्रा मानव द्वारा निर्धारित नहीं की जा सकती।यह अपराध है।
यदि किन्ही परिस्थिति में ऐसा किया जाना अनुमत भी हो तो भी ऐसा तभी किया जाना चाहिये जब अन्य सारे विकल्प शेष न रह गये हो। विवशताकारी क्षणों में भी यदि समाज को यह निर्णय लेना पड़ता है तो भी समाज के लिये दुःखद है, चिन्ता का विषय है। समाज को चिन्तित तो हो ही जाना चाहिये।
मानव का जीवन अमुल्य है। उसे समाप्त करने का निर्णय कितना भी अपरिहार्य क्यों न रहा हो, विवशताकारी क्यों न हो, बुद्धिमत्तापूर्ण क्यों न हो, सामाजिक हित में क्यों न रहा हो, यह आनन्ददायी निर्णय तो हो ही नहीं सकता।
जो भी समाज अपने मानव -बध के निर्णय को न्यायोचित ठहराते हैं वे भी इस निर्णय को भारी मन से ही स्वीकारते हैं।
मैं आज किसी भी प्रकार न्याय के नाम पर भी प्रसन्न तो नहीं ही हो सकता।
न्याय के लिये यह मजबूरी में किया गया निर्णय भारी मन से स्वीकार करने के सिवा कोई विकल्प नहीं है पर इस पर मैं तालियाँ नहीं बजा सकता, हाँ शर्मिन्दा जरूर हो सकता हूँ कि मै भी उसी समाज का हिस्सा हूँ जिस समाज में मृत्युदन्ड् के अधिकारी रहते हैं, कहीं न कहीं उनके पाप के किसी हिस्से का अनजाने ही दोषी तो हम सभी समाज के लोग ही हैं कि हमारे सामने ही ऐसी स्थिति बार बार पैदा होती रहती है।
मेरी चिन्ता, शर्मिन्दगी और बढ़ जाती है जब मैं इस निर्णय पर अपने चारों और तालियों की आवाज सुनता हूँ- ---। लगा की मै हजारों साल पीछे चला गया।
दरिन्दगी का जबाब दरिन्दगी नहीं हो सकती, समाज की स्विकृति हो तब भी नहीं।
यह निर्णय आत्मावलोकन का अवसर देता है, उदास हो जाने का एक और कारण है तथा प्रार्थना करने का समय है कि पुनः इस तरह का निर्णय समाज को लेने के लिये विवश नहीं होना पड़े।
कम से कम खुश होने का तो कोइ कारण ही नहीं है।

।

The patent dishonesty of litigants has always been a real threat in the pathway of delivery of Justice.
Selfish litigants in order to serve their greed, lust often take recourse to tactical falsehood and often mix it with truth or present it to showcase the falsehood as truth in the court of law.
Such acts are being perpetrated with professional skill in a planned way.
This approach has become part of social behaviour. In order to serve self-hood  and in the name of self defence it has become the traditional approach of the society to coverup truth, to cook up truth, to present cooked or mixed truth.
This makes the work of a judge very risky and breeds risk at different stages of judicial proceedings. Quite a few fall a prey to these evil designs.
In order to minimise these risks certain codified norms have been adopted by the courts and the courts try to evaluate as per those predetermined norms and conduct the proceeding through a pre-defined procedure.
These are risk management tools of the justicedelivery system.
For example the courts insist on promptness in stating  the claim to the proper authority to manage the risk of additions, interpolations, development in the statement that makes the details of facts.
The courts insist that these should be written down immediately, once again a tool to manage the risk of resorting to cooked up story or the risk of ommitting the true statement of fact.

Judges must find out justice, secure it and deliver it in usable form to those who seek it.

Judge is the vendor of justice. In order to cater the needs of justice-seekers he blends law with wisdom in equitable proportions . A judge ensures utility and satisfaction both a point that earns maximum social acceptance. The level of social acceptability of judge's judgement is the individual efficiency of the judge and the level of legal consistency, transparency of the judgement enhances the social esteem of justice delivery system.
Trustworthiness, uniformity and reasonable predictability  are the three pillars upon which a sensible justice delivery system must grow and each judge must contribute within the system to enhance these three ingredients.

Training points to be identified
Overall for a judge
A rewritable judge
A  clean judge
A fearless judge
A knowledgable judge
A learned judge
A legal judge
 A cool judge
A performing judge
an impartial judge
A consistant judge
A transparent judge
A wise judge
A consentious judge
A punctual judge
A well prepared judge
Not dependent on bar
Not dependent on office
A Driver judge
Not a driven judge
A controller judge
Not a controlled Judge




Where did the earlier judges fail
They were subjective
They showed apparent gender prejudices
They failed to take the constitution as their baseline
They differed drastically at the fall of every hat
They showed extremities
They lacked innovation
They allowed pre-independence notions to prevail.
They were untrained judges
They suffered from divine ego
They nurtured divine mine set
They communicated sans-recourse
 They communicated egoistically
They were ill exposed
They were ill educated in law
They only thought of my case, my court and me, none shared or created a system vision or concern
They doubted every coming generation as if they were the zenith of human evolution.
They were really showy
They nurtured class bias and caste bias
They showed super ambitions
Only a few could remain really sober.
They practised opaque personality
They did very little research
THey decided cases and did not care for law
They did not develop standard bench marks
On the administrative side they failed to show fairness.
They proved bad planners
They proved slow administrators
The judges did not take the declarations of apex bodies really serious







Where the new generation judge has to improve

No more divine judge
No more instinctive judge
Standard trained judge
No male judge, nor female judge
 No hindu judge nor muslim etc judge
Only constitutionalist judge
No convicting judge, nor liberal judge
only legal judge
More exact judge
lesser ego, more transparent
Really prompt judge
A 24X7 judge, investing his whole energy for his job
More knowledgeable judge






Benchmarks /footprints of the ealier generation
We had H R khanna and many more courageous judges
We had Bhopal District Judge Who gave the intrim order
We had judges at the ground level who earned appreciation of Apex Court
Judiciary guided,decided but never confronted
Judges acted as a vigilant guard
Whole judiciary acted together without fear
Indian Judiciary is one of the best performing judiciary














for civil side
How to read the plaint /WS and each application- art of
How to find out the doctored ,embroidered , evasive, oscillating pleadings  
How to find out rub, point of difference.
Examining the parties-art of
getting truth in the court unofficially but legally
How to get the parties to agree to sort out the rub- art of
Comparing the pleadings, reading together
Judges must not be dependent on lawyers or office


















For criminal side

To learn to appreciate on human probability
To see that stating the charg to the accused intellegently , completetly as per law is foremost duty of the court. Judges have been found negligent on this count.
To ensure that explaining all the adverse material against an accused must be put before the accused so that the materials can be explained by him. This duty has to be discharged religiously. Judges do fail on this count.
To allow all the relevant material to be brought on record.
To protect the Victim, witness and the evidence .
To ensure fair trial, only proportionate sentence.
To ensure adequate compensation to the victims, sufferers
To ensure fair and complete recording of evidence.
To take down the demeanour of the witnesses
To be active while witness is in dock and ensure that the witness is not gagged.










As legal service activist















As manager and administrator

















With bar










With other stake older
















as a judicial leader









as a constitutional army men














as a human being

State and law

Revenue collection for state -Why?
Who will collect for the state and who will watch the revenue collector?
What should be the limits of state- minimum, maximum?
Whether state prevails over the individual?
Whether state as an institution should be allowed to prevail over other human organisations or institution?
Whether state should be accorded the supreme status?
What should be the relation between the state priority and other institutional priorities?
What should be the relation between state status versus individual dignity?
How state is to be represented?
How state has to be felt?
Whether the wish of state must prevail?
How the state wisdom can be watched?
Who will state the exact status of state?
To what extent individual  subjected to the supremacy of state?
Whether an individual has got no remedy against state?
ow the conflict between state and individual can be resolved?
Whether Divine Theory Of State still holds good?
What is the present theoritical status of state?
What is the de facto status of state in the present scenario?
What is the de jure status of state in the present scenario?
What is the political status of state in the present scenario when states are coming up on fall of a hat and the other day vanishing through agreements as if corporate acquisitions, amalgamations, take-over?
Whether the status of state has been diluted to a considerable level?
Whether there are several grades of state in the present political scenario?
Whether state made laws are now getting irrelevant?