Many languages are used in domains of public affairs at different levels in a multilingual state. For example, the language used for settling disputes at the village level, the language used in making First Information Reports at the police station at the lowest level, the language used at the Taluk and District Courts, and State High Courts are not always the same. The Official Language Commission report recognises this fact. India has a literacy of 42%, an English speaking population between 2 to 4 percent, 13 major languages having literary history of about 1000 years each, it is natural that the court room language is a combination of illiterate spoken languages, literate spoken language, standard written language and language alien to most litigants. But no systematic study of the structures of these languages, the manner in which they function in the judicial domain and the nature of linkages of one with another have been made. One study made by Kidder (1976) speaks of differing language of litigation in court at different levels of the judicial system -

Thus in a small town the lowest level “Munsiff’s Magistrate’s Court”, one can expect to find the entire proceedings conducted in the language of that town. This means that not only the testimony of witnesses but also the remarks of the judge to the advocates and their remarks to him and to each other will all take place in the local language. The clerk reads the calendar in tat language, makes announcements in it, and gives directives in it. Witnesses are sworn in using a translation from the English. The judge uses the local language for announcements of decisions and verdicts. The only intrusion of English into such proceedings comes from the need of the judge to translate all testimony into English for the official record. In most low-level rural courts, this was handled by the judge listening to a sequence of testimony on one subject and then reciting to the clerk a capsulized English summary of what the witness had said. The opposing lawyers assisted in the construction of this summary by correcting the judge’s error as they occurred.

Courts of the same level in Bangalore City followed the same procedures when possible. There was, however, a tendency towards more use of English between lawyers and judges, particularly when the languages of the opponents were different.

As one moves up the ladder of courts in Bangalore, he encounters increasing use of English. In the High Court, local languages have no place whatsoever, except in the rare case where a witness is recalled in order to repeat his testimony. In such a case, his words are immediately translated, and his meaning is discussed informally by lawyers and judges alike in English.

In between the High Court and the Munsiff’s Court are gradations of English users, so that even in lower courts of original jurisdiction, lawyers, clerks and judges often vacillate between local languages and English, using English to convey the more precise legal meanings of points they have been making in the local languages. In general, for most original suits, English is used to promote legal points, and the higher the court, the more likely it is that English will also be used to discuss factual matters.

Courts in urban areas and larger towns encounter problems with the diverse linguistic origins of witnesses who come before them. If a judge or court reporter does not understand the language of a witness, a translator is called in to translate the testimony sentence by sentence as it is delivered. Such translators are not necessarily hired for the purpose - often they are persons with other roles at court who are known to be competent in particular languages”.

In India, unfortunately legal translation, scientific translation and literary or journalistic translation are seen as compartments. There is not a single Institute for scientific study of translation in the country. In any discussion of language and law this factor assumes prominence. In a Parliamentary democracy language use in domains involving law merits serious attention of the citizen. To maintain a well ordered society, enforcement of law is coded, which if not available in the languages of the people results in legal illiteracy, and lack of legal education. If language of law is the language of the elite, then by providing limited access to law to many, it tends to create an unequal society. The Constitution of India and the Official Language Acts of States enshrine language rights of citizens.