Interning over the years in courts, I have noticed that many lawyers "set (collude with)" public prosecutors, bribe clerks in court to get favourable date for next hearing, and bribe witnesses to be hostile ......I know all these are wrong. I also know that producing false documentary evidences and tampering with evidence is also wrong. But what about tutoring your client to speak false stuff in court about what had happened. Does it come under giving best possible defence and due process or is this unethical as well. I am asking this because as I see if the lawyer doesn't tutor the witness to lie in the best possible way for appropriate questions, it is very easy, though not always, for public prosecutors to win the case. It is so common for lawyers especially at the trial stage that I think it might be within the ambit of professional ethics for advocates, just like representation of a client whom you know is actually guilty. But I didn't find anything to hold this view in my research. I am yet to intern at higher judiciary and in commercial landscapes like nclt or bom and del hc...I wanted to know whether practice there be filled with as unethical stuff as I see here in M.P. Thanks . Also please don't troll guys.

I think it should come under best possible defence ......otherwise lawyers are out of job but I don't think it's mentioned anywhere.