Veteran Lawyer Urges ‘Comprehensive Thinking’ For Getting To The Crux of A Case  

Veteran Lawyer Urges ‘Comprehensive Thinking’ For Getting To The Crux of A Case  
Veteran Lawyer Urges ‘Comprehensive Thinking’ For Getting To The Crux of A Case  

A veteran lawyer shared valuable tips regarding the practice of law at a session organized by the Study Circle Committee which is part of the High Court Bar Association (HCBA), Nagpur earlier this week
KH Deshpande, senior counsel at Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court  said that he started practicing law in 1960 when the reorganization of states was ongoing and has seen the evolution of the judiciary.


He observed that at that point in time people became lawyers when they couldn’t find jobs and the law was considered as “a business rather than a profession.” Deshpande pointed out that more youngsters are keen to join law now-a-days as it is considered as a legitimate profession.

Don’t Depend On Technology


Deshpande noted that with the introduction of technology, it was now easier for lawyers to retrieve case laws and precedence but cautioned against placing too much reliance on such convenience.


According to him “getting” things readily affects  “original thinking,”  and rather than just using an observation in a judgement,  lawyers must find the “crux of the case” by “thinking comprehensively”.

In regards to the judicial process, the senior advocate noted that judges need to be “more objective than subjective”. Deshpande observed that is “human nature” that at times, judges “project a certain idea” they have onto their judgement, which he said should not happen.


The Story Behind Deshpande’s Famed Comment


Advocate Renuka Sirpurkar, who had conducted the session, requested Deshpande to talk about the election petition that had been filed by former deputy chief minister of Maharashtra Nashikrao Tirpude against his opponent.


While making his arguments before the Supreme Court, the veteran lawyer had made the famous observation that ‘the opposition is staging Hamlet without the prince of Denmark’. Deshpande had been a government pleader in the case.


Deshpande explained that the plea had been filed when Tirpude lost the elections but the Nagpur bench failed to believe the evidence. Tirpude then moved the Supreme Court, wherein during arguments regarding lack of evidence, Deshpande said he had made the comment.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here