Image credit: Livelaw.com
India has been a fabulous country with one of the oldest and matchless civilization to boast about. We have got a high-toned, beautiful Constitution. However, it is unquestioned that it is not the words of the Constitution but the persons who manage it, that make it triumphant. In our country the judiciary has been given the task to safeguard the rights granted to citizens, and also entrusted with the task to see that the organs of the Government function within their framework, especially concerning rights of citizens. Thus, it is crucial that the judicial system is efficient and competent so that the laws conferring rights are not rendered meaningless and illogical in reality.
Judges play a significant role in the administration of justice and further the trial Judge has a considerable role to play in the dispensation of justice. The conduct of every judicial officer should be beyond reproach. He should be impartial, honest, sincere, courageous, regardless of public praise. Each case coming before the judge has its own distinctiveness and needs a fresh application of mind and skill. Therefore, the independence of the judiciary, personal conduct and nature of judicial officer who presides over this are the prominent branch that have to be dealt with care and caution.
WHAT IS JUDICIAL SERVICE EXAMINATION AND ITS ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Judicial Services Examination or the Provincial Civil Service (PCS), are entry-level tests for law graduates to become members of the subordinate courts. Members of the lower judiciary are appointed by the state governments under the supervisions of the respective high courts, based on the competitive exams. The eligibility criteria for appearing in Judicial Services Examination in India is a degree in L.L.B and enrollment or qualified to be enrolled as an Advocate under the Advocates’ Act 1961. There is no requirement of experience and final year candidates can also appear for the same. The age limit differs according to the state. Age limit is usually between 21 to 35 years.
BCI MOVES SC FAVORING MANDATORY 3 YEARS ADVOCATE EXPERIENCE FOR JUDICIAL SERVICE EXAMINATIONS
The Bar Council of India (BCI) has moved the Supreme Court against allowing fresh law graduates without any practical experience to appear for the Judicial Service Examinations. In an impleadment application filed before the apex court, it is strongly in favor of a prescribed minimum experience of three years at the Bar for being considered eligible to appear for the examination. The Council has taken the decision to file a plea in the Apex Court looking for a modification of the Court’s 2002 order whereby it had removed the requirement of 3-year experience as a lawyer. In India, a three-year prior legal practice experience was mandatory to apply for the judicial services. However, this was removed by the Supreme Court in the case of All India Judges’ Association and Others V. Union of India in 2002.
The BCI also announced that it will also file an application in the recent petition filed in the Apex Court seeking modification in the notification issued by the Andhra Pradesh High Court which made 3 years minimum practice as an advocate mandatory for applying for the posts of civil judge junior division. Mr. RegalgaddaVenkatesh, who is petitioner in that case, challenges Rule 5(2)(a)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh State Judicial Service Rulesof 2007 which lays down such a requirement. SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENCE BENEFITS JUDGES
Law graduates in India can apply for the post of the judicial officer immediately after completing their graduation without any prior experience of legal practice. Consequently, it has become very common for extremely young law graduates with no experience to join judicial services. Such candidates are likely to have little to no experience of legal practice, also they are scarcely possible to have notable life experiences having lived a protected experience with their parents or on a university campus.
In an application filed before the Supreme Court, the regulator has submitted that newly graduated judicial officers who are not having practical experience at the Bar are largely found to "be incapable and inept in handling matters" and it is also one of the main reasons for delay in disposal of cases in subordinate courts.
Despite the fact that all the high courts have tried to ensure the establishment of state judicial academies, actually providing impactful induction training to new trainees has proved to be challenging. There are loopholes in the ongoing system of training being given in the judicial academies because most of them lack the faculty needed to provide a highly structured induction training programme for new judicial officers.
INDIAN JUDICIARY NEEDS FRESH BLOOD
The question should be whether we are attracting the finest talent because a brilliant young law graduate finds judicial service unattractive after three years of practice. There is requirement of a certain amount of fresh blood in the Indian judiciary. People who have that idealism that’s required to change things and newness of outlook. People who aren’t so set in their ways that they can’t bring freshness. After all, sometimes it takes an outsider to come in and look at things in a distinct perspective and help us see things better. This is not to suggest that experience isn’t precious but the lack of litigation experience is offset in a lot of ways by good training at the academy. One-year training at judicial academies does impart useful education.
India has the proud distinction of being a vibrant democracy, which not only has an independent judiciary but also unites with a society that recognises the existence of the rule of law. For the sustenance of a true democracy, administration of justice should be in the hands of not only capable but also conscientious, honest persons so that justice is rendered which is crucial for a free society.
 (1992) 1 SCC 119