Delhi HC slams DHCLSC for failing to assist a financially disadvantaged litigant despite multiple requests, with Justice Singh seeking an explanation for the committee’s inaction during a May 3 hearing.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Recently, The Delhi High Court has criticized the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC) for not providing legal aid to an economically disadvantaged litigant despite numerous requests from the person. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh expressed disappointment over the committee’s inaction and demanded an explanation for its negligence during a hearing on May 3.
The litigant had reached out to the DHCLSC twice, requesting free legal aid, but received no response. The court expressed its disappointment, remarking-
“It is regrettable that DHCLSC has significantly faltered in fulfilling its fundamental obligation of offering counsel/legal support to the indigent litigant. Therefore, rather than facilitating avenues for obtaining justice for financially disadvantaged litigants, DHCLSC has obstructed progress.”
The issue emerged during the May 3 hearing when the litigant, representing themselves, objected to a request for adjournment proposed by the opposing counsel. Revealing their protracted legal battle since 2016, the litigant contested the petitioner’s plea for postponement. Subsequently, the court engaged in dialogue with the litigant, probing whether they desired legal aid from a lawyer designated by the DHCLSC.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Held Workshop For Panel Lawyers on Legal Aid Digitalization
The litigant responded by explaining that he had written two letters—one in October 2023 and another in March 2024—to the DHCLSC, seeking legal aid as he could not afford to hire a private lawyer. However, despite his efforts, the committee failed to provide him with any legal counsel. The litigant also stated that he had made oral requests to the committee for a lawyer, but they were also futile.
In light of the committee’s negligence, the court took the initiative to appoint Advocate Gaurav Kumar Pandey as the litigant’s counsel and directed the DHSLSC to cover the lawyer’s fees. Additionally, the court demanded an explanation from the DHCLSC regarding its failure to appoint a lawyer for the litigant despite his explicit requests.
The court’s order stated-
“Considering the circumstances presented, this Court finds it necessary to request an affidavit from the Secretary, DHCLSC, elucidating why, despite the submission of two letters by the financially disadvantaged litigant, which were duly received by the DHCLSC, legal assistance was not extended to the litigant. The Secretary, DHCLSC, is instructed to submit the affidavit within ten days.”
Furthermore, the court emphasized that Legal Service Authorities were established with the purpose of ensuring that all underprivileged citizens have access to free legal aid. It highlighted the significant role played by these authorities in granting justice to those facing economic or financial hardships.
The court firmly stated-
“Hence, if any eligible litigant seeks aid or assistance, the Legal Service Authorities are mandated to promptly respond and provide the necessary support.”
The discussion is scheduled to resume on May 6.
ALSO READ: Parliamentary Committee Urges Enhanced Funding for Legal Aid in India
Advocate Sugam Mishra represented the petitioner, Atlas Logistics Private Limited, while the respondent, Jitendra Kumar, appeared in person for the hearing.
CASE TITLE:
Atlas Logistic Pvt Ltd v Jitendra Kumar
