CHAPTER III
ADMISSION AND ENROLMENT OF
ADVOCATES
• S. 16. Senior and other advocates
• S. 20. Special provision for enrolment of certain
Supreme Court advocates
• S. 21. Disputes regarding seniority
• S. 22. Certificate of enrolment
• S. 23. Right of pre-audience
• S. 24. Persons who may be admitted as advocates on a
State roll
• S. 24A. Disqualification for enrolment
• S. 25. Authority to whom applications for enrolment
may be made
• S. 26. Disposal of applications for admission as an
advocate
S. 16. Senior and other advocates
Classes of Advocates
Qualification for Senior advocates
BCI Rules regarding Senior advocates under S. 49(1)(g)
Part VI- Rules Governing Advocates
Chapter I- Restrictions on Senior Advocates
(Rules Under Sections 16 (3) and 49 (1) (g) of the Act)
Senior Advocates shall, in the matter of their practice of the profession of law
mentioned in Section 30 of the Act, be subject to the following restrictions:
(a) A Senior Advocate shall not file a vakalatnama or act in any Court, or
Tribunal, or before any person or other authority mentioned in Section 30 of
the Act. Explanation : “To act” means to file an appearance or any pleading
or application in any court or Tribunal or before any person or other
authority mentioned in Section 30 of the Act, or to do any act other than
pleading required or authorised by law to be done by a party in such Court or
Tribunal or before any person or other authorities mentioned in the said
Section either in person or by his recognised agent or by an advocate or an
attorney on his behalf.
(b) (i) A Senior Advocate shall not appear without an Advocate on Record in
the Supreme Court or without an Advocate in Part II of the State Roll in any
court or Tribunal or before any person or other authorities mentioned in
Section 30 of the Act.
(ii) Where a Senior Advocate has been engaged prior to the coming into
force of the rules in this Chapter, he shall not continue thereafter unless an
advocate in Part II of the State Roll is engaged along with him. Provided that
a Senior Advocate may continue to appear without an advocate in Part II of
the Sate Roll in cases in which he had been briefed to appear for the
prosecution or the defence in a criminal case, if he was so briefed before he
is designated as a senior advocate or before coming into operation of he
rules in this Chapter as the case may be.
(c) He shall not accept instructions to draft pleading or affidavits, advice on
evidence or to do any drafting work of an analogous kind in any Court or
Tribunal or before any person or other authorities mentioned in Section 30
of the Act or undertake conveyancing work of any kind whatsoever. This
restriction however shall not extend to settling any such matter as aforesaid
in consultation with an advocate in Part II of the State Roll.
(cc) A Senior Advocate shall, however, be free to make
concessions or give undertaking in the course of arguments on
behalf of his clients on instructions from the junior advocate.
(d) He shall not accept directly from a client any brief or
instructions to appear in any Court or Tribunal or before any
person or other authorities in India.
(e) A Senior Advocate who had acted as an Advocate (Junior) in
a case, shall not after he has been designated as a Senior
Advocate advise on grounds of appeal in a Court of Appeal or
in the Supreme Court, except with an Advocate as aforesaid.
(f) A Senior Advocate may in recognition of the services
rendered by an Advocate in Part-II of the State Roll appearing
in any matter pay him a fee which he considers reasonable.
Case: MS Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (2017)
• Ss. 17-19. Roll of Advocates
• S. 20. Special provision for enrolment of certain
Supreme Court advocates
• S. 21. Disputes regarding seniority
• S. 22. Certificate of enrolment
• S. 23. Right of pre-audience
24. Persons who may be admitted as advocates on a State roll.
Case: Bar Council of India v. Bonnie Foi Law College & Ors. (2023)
Overruled V. Sudeer Case
S. 49 r/w S. 24(3)(d)
Affiliation and Recognition by BCI
question of diminishing standards of legal education
Gopal Subramanium Committee
Report in 2009- Bar Examination in India and Training as apprenticeship
Transferred case to constitution bench in 2016
Issues:
1. Whether pre-enrolment training in terms of Bar Council of India Training Rules,
1995 framed under Section 24(3)(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961 could be validly
prescribed by the Bar Council of India and if so whether the decision of this
Court in Sudeer vs. Bar Council of India & Anr. (1999) requires reconsideration?
2. Whether a pre-enrolment examination can be prescribed by the Bar Council of
India under the Advocates Act, 1961?
3. In case question Nos. 1 and 2 are answered in the negative, whether a post-
enrolment examination can be validly prescribed by the Bar Council of India in
terms of Section 49(1) (ah) of the Advocates Act, 1961?
Cited case laws:
1. V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India(1999) - A conjoint
reading of Sections 23, 29 and 33 clarifies that a person
who is found qualified to be admitted as an advocate on
the State Roll by satisfying the statutory conditions under
Section 24(1), will automatically become entitled to
practice full-fledged in any court including the Supreme
Court.
Hence, the statutory conditions under Section 24(1) are
satisfied unless a disqualification takes place under
Section 24A of the said Act.
The concept of pre-enrolment training was held to be not
necessary. On various grounds the 1995 Rules were held
ultra vires the said Act and was, thus, invalid.
2. Indian Council of Legal Aid and Advice & Ors. v. Bar
Council of India & Anr.(1995)- The Court struck down the
endeavor of the Bar Council of India to put an age cap on
the entry into the profession. The Bar Council of India had
prescribed that any person who had completed the age of
45 years on the date on which he submitted his application
would not be entitled to be enrolled as an advocate.
3. Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra &
Goa (1996)- A medical doctor who studied law challenged
the Bar Council’s rejection of his application for enrolment
as an advocate. Supreme Court held that “the legal
profession requires full time attention and would not
countenance an Advocate riding two horses or more at a
time”.
• Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Senior Advocate as Amicus
Curiae to assist the Court in this matter.
• SC- “Quality of lawyers is an important aspect and
part of administration of justice and access to justice.
Half baked lawyers serve no purpose. It is this quality
control, which has been the endeavour of all the
efforts made over a period of time. Neither these
provisions of Advocates Act , nor the role of the
universities to impart legal education, in any way,
prohibit the Bar Council of India from conducting
pre-enrolment examination, as the Council is directly
concerned with the standard of persons who want to
obtain a license to practice law as a profession.”
• Third issue: Section 49 deals with the general powers of Bar
Council of India to make rules and Sub-Clause (ah) specifically
deals with the conditions subject to which an Advocate shall
have the right to practise and the circumstances under which
a person can be deemed to practise as an Advocate in a Court.
SC- “the meaning of entitlement, would indicate that the Bar
Council of India could prescribe such conditions, which would
give the right or claim to a person to be enrolled as an advocate
and the power of Bar Council of India prior to enrolment cannot
be ousted. It has to be left to the Bar Council of India as to at
what stage the All India Bar Examination has to be held – pre or
post. We may take note of the fact that the All India Bar
Examination is scheduled to be held twice in a year. It is
necessary that this schedule should be strictly followed as
otherwise the students with law degrees would be left idling
their time.”
S. 24. Persons who may be admitted as advocates on a State roll
• Qualifications
• Provisions for vakil or a pleader
• Pre-Legislation enrolment
• Important Cases:
1. Parmatma Prasad v. Union of India (1971)- Mukhtarship examination
2. Ramakant Samanta v. State Bar Council (1975)- Person may not be
Mukhtar immediately before Act
3. Indian Council of Legal Aid and Advice & Ors. v. Bar Council of India &
Anr.(1995)- Age-cap rule
4. L.M. Mahurkar v. Bar Council of Maharashtra (1996)- Sales Tax
Practitioner Case
5. Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa (1996)
6. V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India(1999)
7. Thomas P.C. v. Bar Council of Kerala (2006)- Being Priest or Nun is not
disqualification to get enrolled as an advocate
• S. 24A. Disqualification for enrolment
convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude
convicted under Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955
dismissed or removed from employment or office under
the State on any charge involving moral turpitude
Exception
1. after a period of two years has elapsed since his released
or dismissal or, as the case may be, removal
2. person who found guilty is dealt with under the
provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958\
Case: Anees Ahmed And Anr. v. University Of Delhi And Ors.
(2002)
Case: Smt. Manjula B.R. And Ors. v. Karnataka State Bar
Council (2002)
• S. 25. Authority to whom applications for enrolment
may be made
to the State Bar Council within whose jurisdiction the
applicant proposes to practise.
• S. 26. Disposal of applications for admission as an
advocate
Application referred to enrolment committee
Enrolment by misrepresentation or by fraud or undue
influence- Name removed
Refusal of application- opinion of Bar Council of India
Refusal of application- intimation to all other State
Bar Councils
• S. 26A. Power to remove names from roll
Death or a request
• S. 27. Application once refused not to be entertained
by another Bar Council except in certain
circumstances
With the previous consent in writing of the State Bar
Council which refused the application and of the Bar
Council of India
• S. 28. Power to make rules
Rules regarding Admission and Enrolment
Approval by the Bar Council of India required
