A research scholar has to work as a judge and drive the truth and as a pleader who is only eager to prove his case in favour of his plaintiff disscuss?

A research scholar acting as a judge must strive for impartiality, meticulously evaluating evidence and weighing arguments to uncover the truth. In contrast, a pleader focuses on advocating passionately for their client's interests, often presenting information in a way that supports their case. This duality highlights the tension between objective truth-seeking and subjective advocacy, underscoring the importance of integrity in both roles to ensure justice is served. Ultimately, a balanced approach is essential, where the pursuit of truth does not compromise the advocacy needed in legal contexts.