In March 2025, while appearing in person in my own civil suit, I experienced an incident that reminded me how far our justice system has drifted from human sensitivity. I was dressed in a black pant and black coat — not as an advocate, but as a litigant-in-person exercising my right to argue my own matter. Without any prior notice, the Presiding Officer directed me to remove my black coat.
The direction was sudden, unexpected, and completely disconnected from any legal requirement. I was not wearing an advocate’s band or gown; I was not claiming the privileges of the Bar; I was simply a citizen seeking justice. Yet the courtroom atmosphere turned from a forum of law into a space where even basic dignity felt negotiable.
I objected respectfully and stated that if the Court believed I was violating any rule, an express order should be passed so that I may challenge it. The Court then withdrew the demand — not because there was legal basis, but because there was none.
This episode exposed a deeper truth:
Our judiciary often forgets the human face behind the litigant.
Procedural rigidity is applied selectively. Directions are issued inconsistently. A litigant-in-person is frequently treated as an inconvenience rather than a participant in the justice delivery system.
The question is simple yet uncomfortable:
Should courtroom authority be exercised in a manner that causes unnecessary embarrassment to a citizen who comes seeking justice?
When dignity becomes a casualty in the very place meant to protect it, the conversation must shift—from blind deference to honest introspection. Courts command respect, but that respect is strengthened, not weakened, when judicial conduct reflects fairness, clarity, and empathy.
My experience is not isolated. Thousands of litigants across India face subtle forms of humiliation, condescension, and arbitrary directions that have no place in a constitutional democracy. Raising this issue is not an attack on the judiciary but an affirmation of its higher purpose:
to deliver justice with humanity, not hierarchy.
The judiciary is the guardian of rights — but it must also remain conscious of its own duty to uphold the dignity of every person who walks into a courtroom.
Issued for larger Public Interest by Ad. Anil Bugde, High Court, Bombay.
