Thread by @Hareshraichura

Thread "How to argue in court" - an easy to understand explanation to day to day Court Language.

1) First learn, "What is a Statement and how to make a statement to open an argument in a court.

a) "Defendant is fraud" This is your opinion. This is not

#lawyers #lawstudents

2/ a Statement for purpose of argument.

b) "Defendant has cheated me." This is again, your opinion. This is not a Statement for purpose of argument.

c) "Defendant cheated me of 50 lakh rupees by giving promise of giving a flat". This can do. The Judge

#lawyers #lawstudebt

3/ can understand what is your problem.

Judge can then ask you, "Why do you say so? What is your basis for saying so?"

Now here you are supposed to answer with some evidence (documents or other things) from which it is obvious that you might be speaking truth.

#law #lawyers

4/ You then show to judge an agreement to sele flat on basis of which you say that you have given 50 lakh rupees to Defendant.

Judge will look at it and will ask, "Is this all that you want to say? Do you wish to say anything more?"

You reply that "That is all".

#lawyer #law

5/ Then the Judge will dictate a Judgement saying that you have not been able to prove your case and your case is dismissed.

He will then move on to here next case.

You will wonder why did judge dismissed your case.

#law #lawyers #lawstudents #advocate #lawschool

6/ Now what went wrong here?

First, you did not know ingredient of "Cheating". This is a technical word in court language. When you allege cheating, you have to state and prove certain things. You did not know what were those things.

#law #lawstudents #lawyers

7/ Second, Judge can rely on any document only if it is proved in certain way as per Evidence Act. You had never read Evidence Act so you did not know this procedure.

As your agreement to sale was not proved as per Evidence Act, the Judge dismissed your case.

#law #lawyers

8/ If you had desire to argue your own case, without engaging any lawyer, you should have studied relevant provisions of Penal Code and Evidence Act,

This is main reason why many Party in Persons lose their case even when their case was true..

#law #lawyers #lawschool

9/ Parties who come to argue their own cases, often come with judgements researched from internet and they are confident of winning their cases.

These judgements cannot help them unless basic requirement of "Cheating" and "Document proving" were first fulfilled.

#law #lawyers

10/ Here, you must know limitations of a Judge.

A judge cannot advise or guide you. He may be knowing in his heart that your case is true. But he cannot give you any hints on how to plead and prove your case. He cannot tell you that you need to prove signatures first.

#lawyers

11/ The Judge cannot guide you that for proving cheating you had to prove that and such a such date he made some representation to you and on basis of that you had parted with your money. The Judge cannot guide you that you had to further prove that even before

#lawyers #law

12/ before making representation, the defendant had no intention to sell flat, he had no title deeds to the land or that he had cheated many others earlier also.

Remember that Judge can neither guide you nor he can guide your opponent.

#law #lawyers #lawstudents

13/ Most of the arguments in courts have usually three parts.

A) One part is statements you want to prove

B) Evidence, documents in support of A

C) The collection of evidence in B should be sufficient to prove A.

#law #lawyers #lawstudents

14/ Part A should be in accordance with laws of pleadings

Part B should be as per Evidence Act.

Part C should be as per laws of reason, common sense, logic, jurisprudence (Judge made laws) etc.

15/ Now try to understand difference between *Arguments in a TV Studio" and "Arguments in courts"

Participants in TV arguments do not have to stick to Evidence Act

In Court Arguments, you are supposed to stick to Evidence Act and other settled norms of Justice

#law #lawyers

16/ A judge hears arguments by asking questions.

For every type of case or application, a set of questions is programmed in the mind of a judge.

These questions are predictable to a large extent.

One should prepare answers around these questions.

#lawyers #lawstudents

17/ For example, in case of cheating, the judge can ask a) When did the cheating took place? b) When did you learn about cheating? c) When did you file complaint?

Then he will compare time gaps. These will give him some idea about the truth.

#lawyers #lawstudents

18/ In case of rape, a Judge may ask a) What was the age of victim at time of incident? b) What does medical report say? c) What was the age of accused at time of incident?

On basis of these questions, the Judge can know how serious the crime is.

#lawyers #law #lawstudents

19/ To argue successfully, you should first learn to identify "Relevant Facts" and "Relevant Questions That Judge May Ask".

It is not very difficult to learn this.

#lawyers #lawschool #lawstudents #lawtwitter #argument

20/ For example, "A man wearing yellow shirt and blue paint died in a car accident"

Here, none of above facts is relevant to decide negligence of Driver.

For that purpose, "Speed of car" is "Relevant Fact".

#lawstudents #lawyers

21/ Those who may want to learn more about arguments, may check my free telegram app book mentioned in bio.

#lawyers #lawstudents #law