The Evolution of Legal Aid in India

- Nishant Gokhale

Introduction

Looking at legal aid as one of the alternatives has been problematic in two senses.
Firstly, is the “problem of scope” which can be divided into two sub-categories. The first leg of
this is legal aid’s association with the formal adjudicatory system. Due to this, its efforts have
been largely restricted to securing representation in courts. The second leg of this is that it has
further been constrained by limiting its applicability to poverty-related issues.
Secondly, is the “problem of the institutions”. This too can be further sub-divided into two parts.
The first leg relates to State-sponsored Legal Aid which is largely the authorities established
under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. While the original Act creating a structure for
the legal aid authorities, it has been unable to break out of the “problems of scope”. While the
introduction of Lok Adalats has to some extent addressed it, it has not been able to break out of
the poverty rubric. The second leg has been the lack of recognition of the role of organizations
outside the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 leading to legal aid provided by law schools 1 to
be completely ignored.
Due to the lack of acknowledgement and a clear mandate, these Law School Legal Aid Clinics
have been unable to realize their full potential. It is my claim that clinical legal aid can assist
existing mechanisms such as Lok Adalats as well as be able to provide standalone preventive and
remedial solutions.
I have divided this paper into three parts. In the first part, I look at the evolution of legal aid in
pre-independence India. In the second part, I look at legal in post-independence India. In the
third part, I look at legal aid in law-schools.

Section I: Legal Aid in Pre-Independence India

1
For the purpose of this paper, by “law schools”, I mean those colleges and Universities offering 3 year and 5 year
LLB Programmes, unless otherwise stated.

1
Legal aid is a concept which scholars trace back to the East India Company’s assuming control
of the criminal justice system from the hands of the Mughal rulers. 2 The transition to this system,
was not by any means smooth. The British justice system, being alien to the Indians, faced a
severe credibility crisis. Even the lawyers who were licensed by the government to practice in
Indian courts were seen as mere tools of the British which used them to quell any form of
dissent.3
The problem of credibility manifested itself in several important political trials such as that of
Bahadur Shah Zafar right after the 1857 revolt wherein he was effectively denied the right to
legal representation and eventually exiled.4 Therefore, it is possible that the first conception of
legal aid comes as a measure to effectively control the Indian populace by restoring their faith in
the justice system.
It is for this purpose that the Code of Criminal Procedure, when first passed in 1898 contained a
provision wherein the accused when on trial for a capital offence before the sessions court, had
the opportunity to be represented by a lawyer at the expense of the state. Such sort of protection
however, was discretionary and depended largely on the political sensitivity of the case.
However, considering the limited nature of protection afforded by such legal aid, many sought to
find solutions outside the legislative schemes for legal representation for the economically worst
off. Significant amongst such groups was the Bombay Legal Aid Society which started in 1924
with the scope of its work being providing free representation and paying court fees to enable
access to justice to the poor. With meager funding and industrial houses and the Bombay
government, it took up the cases of indigent persons before the Bombay High Court. It was infact
this body that recommended that a system of legal assistance and representation be introduced
across India. 5
The understanding of legal aid in this period clearly suffered from the problem of scope as it is
court-oriented and poverty-centric.

2
Jain (1989), pp. 134-135.
3
Murlidhar (2004), p. 32.
4
Noorani (2005), p. 77. A day after his appointment and meeting Bahadur Shah Zafar, the lawyer was called as a
witness for the prosecution.
5
Murlidhar (2004), p. 36-37.

2
 Section II: Legal Aid in Post-Independence India

The newly formed nation of India had more than its fair share of problems. One of these was the
problem of crushing poverty. The story of legal aid in post-independence India therefore is told
through the reports prepared by the government and circulated across various ministries. In this
part, I shall be restricting myself only to the relevant portions of the important reports on legal
aid.
While efforts to increase the effectiveness started as early as 1950 in Bombay and Calcutta, these
efforts focused on the creation of a multi-tiered system of legal representation by the judiciary
but restricted its scope only to those persons who were indigent.6
A meeting of Law Ministers of various states in 1958 culminated into the creation of the Kerala
Legal Aid Rules in 1957 which extended the protection of legal aid to those persons who were
unable to afford access to courts.7
The Law Commission of India in 1958 in its 14 th Report devoted a whole chapter to legal aid.
While uncritically consolidating previous initiatives, it called for a graded scheme of fees for
legal to those who were not indigent, but economically weak. 8 However, while recognizing the
role that legal aid clinics played in law schools in the United States, it did not make any
recommendations calling for law schools to be asked to start such clinics in India.
In 1970 the Bhagwati Committee constituted by the Gujarat Government recognized that the
traditional model of legal aid was quite unsuitable to conditions in India which is court-centric.
However, it stated that poverty and legal aid could not be divorced from each other. From the
traditional model of “remedial legal aid”, it shifted its focus on “preventive legal aid”. 9 It was
here for the first time that alternative dispute resolution was advocated through the form of legal
counseling in the nature of negotiated settlements and compromises.10 This is quite significant

6
Ibid, p. 37-39
7
While, the scope was still heavily poverty-centric, it was seen as a part of the larger agenda of the Communist
Party’s in the eradication of inequality in society. It is interesting to note that these rues were framed under the
guidance of then Law Minister of Kerala, Mr.V.R. Krishna Iyer. (as he was then).
8
Austin (1999), p. 141.
9
This included within its ambit legal advice, education and representation. Also, it was felt that there is a need to
include those who handled legal aid cases and not just its clients.
10
Murlidhar (2004), p. 49.

3
because the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms was for the first time advocated in
the provision of legal aid.
The two-member Juridicare Committee appointed by the Central Government in 1976
recommended that there be established a national-level legal aid programme and for the first time
recognized the role of the law schools in providing legal aid. Its emphasis too was on preventive
legal aid and at the pre-litigation stage by negotiating and conciliating disputes outside the court.
Further, it sought participation of law students and voluntary organisations in carrying out its
recommendations.11
However, to neutralize the effectiveness of this Committee, within 10 days of the Committee
being formed, the 42nd Amendment was passed which, amongst several changes, include Article
39-A which asked the State to endeavour to provide legal aid. By this move, the Emergency
government largely nullified any real measures suggested by the Committee. 12 To make matters
worse, when the Juridicare Committee submitted its report in 1977, the Government which had
appointed it was no longer the in power and while Article 39-A remained only on paper, and the
recommendations of the Committee remained, along with the draft National Legal Services Bill
on the shelf.
The issue was seriously considered again only in 1987 with the passing of the Legal Services
Authorities Act, 1987 (LSAA) was passed to further the State’s commitment under Article 39-A
of the Constitution.13 This act expanded legal aid beyond merely the poverty-based notion to the
disadvantaged groups.14 Further with the establishment of Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok
Adalats in an Act meant ostensibly for the administering legal aid indicated a shift away from the
court-centric model. Therefore, quite clearly there necessarily has been a change in the
understanding of legal aid provided by the State.

Over the years, the problems of scope have been addressed to some extent as the thrust has
moved away from a mere poverty-centric understanding to a broader understanding of
11
Murlidhar, (2004), p. 65. This committee comprised of Justice P.N. Bhagwati, author of the Gujarat Committee
report and Justice Krishna Iyer, who spear-headed the Kerala Rules and the Expert Committee reports which in
1976.
12
Murlidhar. p. 68
13
Statement and Object of reasons of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
14
ss. 12, 13 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.

4
“disadvantage”. Further, with institutions such as the Lok Adalats being established, there has
been a shift away from the court-oriented model of legal aid reducing to some extent the
problems of scope. However, the, the role of clinical legal aid has been completely ignored under
the LSAA.

Section III: Legal Aid in Law Schools

The role which the law schools play in the provision of legal aid has been an aspect which has
largely been ignored in academic discourse. Lesser still has been written about their role in
alternative dispute resolution in India. It is due to the lack of recognition of the role that Clinical
Legal Aid plays that the problems of the institutions continue to plague legal aid in India.
The role of law schools in training lawyers is a concept which is relatively new. Law schools
traditionally taught the theory of the law while the job of training of legal professionals was left
to the Bar in the form of apprenticeships. 15 This changed to some extent with the introduction of
the case-book method in the 1900s at Harvard. However, this was found to be insufficient and a
need was felt to counter-balance this with practical experience. 16 The solution was found in the
form of “legal dispensaries” or clinics, inspired by the model of free medical aid in medical
colleges. Here, poor persons could come for free consultation and advice. 17 While most of the
work of these clinics focused on poverty-based issues, the bulk of it was in the nature of
counseling which was not court-centric.
With the growing demand for “relevance in education” legal education shifted its attention to
social issues. Over the years, due to the specializations in various areas of law, there has been a
diversification in the areas in which these clinics operate and range from areas as diverse as
taxation and intellectual property to a specialized branch called “street legal aid” wherein day-to-
day issues as well as poverty-centric issues are addressed. These clinics exist in many different

15
Dubin (1998), pp. 1463-1466.
16
“The clinic thus becomes a 'case book' - not, however, of dead letters descriptive of past controversies, but always
of living issues in the throbbing life of the day, the life the student is now living.", William Rowe, quoted in Barry,
Margaret et al.(2000), p. 7.
17
Dubin (1998), p. 1463.

5
forms, depending on local social and political circumstances and sometimes the available sources
of funding.18
The objective of clinical legal education, therefore, has been two-fold. Their primary aim is to
ensure that students get experiential exposure to diverse situations and the secondary aim is to
ensure that the objectives of social justice are met by providing assistance to those who faced
real legal problems in diverse field.19
The origins of legal education in India, however, are quite different. Legal education in India
followed the general colonial model of producing clerks, not managers. Its primary goal was to
support the existing financial interests of England, certainly not to reform the local legal
profession or promote some sense of social justice. While at the time of independence, there
were approximately 500 law schools operating in India and there was a real chance that they
could be used to promote social justice initiatives through the tool of legal aid. However, due to
the inability of the law schools as well as be body governing them, the Bar Council of India, to
provide professional and infrastructural support, this was not transformed into reality. 20
Some law schools however, took the initiatives such as the Delhi University to carry out a broad-
ranging Legal Aid Clinic and conducted programmes such as prison-legal aid programmes and
representation in the beggars courts.21 However, these programmes suffered from the problems
of scope. Also, due to lack of institutional support, its success was short-lived. With the
government doing a considerable amount of work, albeit beset by problems of scope and
problems of institution, legal aid in law schools was gradually edged out.22
The emergence of the five-year law course at the National Law School, Bangalore and other such
similar institutions started pursuant to the Justice Ahmedi Report in 1994, has helped atleast to
some extent to enable clinical legal aid to be backed by reasonable professional and institutional
support. Further, with the onus squarely on the law-schools to train lawyers rather than leaving it
to the Bar, there is a heightened realization for the incorporation of clinical legal education into

18
Bloch (2008), p. 123.
19
Bloch, and Prasad, (2006), p. 165.
20
Ibid, 172.
21
Ibid, 176.
22
This statement is largely due to the fact that there is very little material on record to show the existence of
vibrant legal aid programmes in law schools. I take the example of Delhi University due to the availability of some
academic material on it.

6
the curriculum. Most significantly, the Bar Council too passed rules to govern these institutions
and has mandated that for accreditation there must exist a functional legal aid clinic within the
law school.23
However, this regulation remains largely on paper and has not been seriously implemented.
Whatever little has happened however, is that previous initiatives such as those by the Delhi
University which follow the traditional model of legal aid have been replicated. It is my claim
therefore, that there needs to be a serious rethinking about clinical legal aid as it has for the most
part failed capture the essence of the dynamism is the field of legal education which was sought
to be brought about by setting up of law schools across the country. Therefore, the conflation
which exists between Clinical Legal Aid and State-sponsored legal aid must be resolved thereby
setting to rest the problems of the institution because while State-sponsored legal aid is statute-
based and therefore heavily bureaucratic, Clinical Legal Aid due to the lack of regulation, offers
much more flexibility which goes unutilized.

Conclusion

Through the course of this paper, I have tried to look at the role of legal aid in India and
development of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. The conclusions which I have come
to at the end of this analysis are as follows.
Firstly, legal aid in India started as a means to quell political dissent under the British rule.
Subsequently too, the understanding of legal aid was restricted to that of representation before
the courts of persons who were unable to represent themselves.
Secondly, after independence, legal aid in India tried to address the problems of poverty through
the State institutions. The Juridicare Committee which brought forth some revolutionary changes
in this system was not seriously implemented.
Thirdly, legal aid offered by the law schools followed the poverty-centric court-oriented model
in the 1960s and this has been sought to be replicated over time. After the establishment of
various national law schools across the country, there has not been a serious discussion of the
role that legal aid clinics play.

23
Rule 31, Chapter III, Bar Council of India Rules on Legal Education, 2008.

7
To conclude, I quote William Pincus24 who succinctly highlights the need to infuse fresh blood
into the legal profession. He states:

..(T)he regular participants in the machinery of justice need incentives to spruce

up their own performance and keep the machinery up to date. One of the best
incentives would be the regular appearance on the scene of a fresh crop of law
students.

Bibliography

Austin, Granville, Working a Democratic Constitution, Oxford India Paperbacks, New Delhi, 1999.

Bar Council of India, Rules on Legal Education, 2008.

Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987

Noorani, A.G, Political Trials in India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2005.

Jain, M.P., Outlines of Indian Legal History, Fifth Edition, Wadhwa, Nagpur, 1989.

Murlidhar, S., Law Poverty and Legal Aid, Lexis Nexis, Butterworth, New Delhi, 2004.

Law Commission of India, 14th Report, Reforms of the Judicial Administration, 1958.

Bloch, Frank and M.R.K. Prasad, “Institutionalizing a Social Justice Mission for Clinical Legal Education: Cross-
national Currents from India and the United States”, 2006, Clinical Law Review Volume 13, p.165.

Barry, Margaret et al., “Clinical Education for this Millennium: The Third Wave”, 2000, Clinical Law Review,
Volume 7, p. 1,

Dubin John, “Clinical Design for Social Justice Imperatives”, 1998, Southern Methodist University Law Review,
Volume 51, 1461.

Bloch, Frank, “New Directions in Clinical Legal Education- Access to Justice and the Global Clinical Movement”,
2008, Washington University Journal of Law And Policy, Volume 28, p. 111

24
President, Council on Legal Education and Professional Responsibility, cited in Dubin (1998), p. 1466