PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

1. Explain the concept of advocacy under professional ethics code.

The term ‘advocacy’ generally encompasses a broad range of activities which seek to influence
decision-making.

Under code of professional ethics, the concept of advocacy is a dynamic process characterized
by taking deliberate actions to instigate change. Advocates organize themselves to strategically
address various issues and empower individuals to voice concerns about the challenges
affecting them negatively. This process is often described as “speaking truth to power.”

key aspects of advocacy:

1. Advocacy is active promotion of a cause or principle.

2. Advocacy involves actions that lead to a selected goal.
3. Advocacy is one of many possible strategies, or ways to approach a problem.
4. Advocacy can be used as part of a community initiative, nested in with other
components.
5. Advocacy is not direct service.
6. Advocacy does not necessarily involve confrontation or conflict.

SEVEN LAMPS OF ADVOCACY:

According to former Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia, to succeed as a lawyer, one must work
like a horse and live like a hermit. A great legal practitioner is said to be a Jack of all trades, a
master of none.
These qualities, along with legal ethics rooted in the Seven Lamps of Advocacy book authored
by Justice Abbott Parry, including honesty, courage, wit, proficiency, competency, bravery,
articulacy and rationality, are essential skills for every legal professional.
 2. Explain the evolution of the legal profession in India from the British
era until today.

The history of the legal profession in India can be traced back to the establishment of the First
British Court in Bombay in 1672 by Governor Aungier. The admission of attorneys was placed
in the hands of the Governor-in-Council and not with the Court. Prior to the establishment of
the Mayor’s Courts in 1726 in Madras and Calcutta, there were no legal practitioners.

The Mayor’s Courts, established in the three presidency towns, were Crown Courts with right
of appeal first to the Governor-in-Council and a right of second appeal to the Privy Council.
In 1791, Judges felt the need of experience, and thus the role of an attorney to protect the
rights of his client was upheld in each of the Mayor’s Courts. This was done in spite of
opposition from Council members or the Governor. A second principle was also established
during the period of the Mayor’s Courts. This was the right to dismiss an attorney guilty of
misconduct.

The Supreme Court of Judicature was established by a Royal Charter in 1774. The Supreme
Court was established as there was dissatisfaction with the weaknesses of the Court of the
Mayor. Similar Supreme Courts were established in Madras in 1801 and Bombay in 1823.
The first barristers appeared in India after the opening of the Supreme Court in Calcutta in
1774. As barristers began to come into the Courts on work as advocates, the attorneys gave
up pleading and worked as solicitors. The two grades of legal practice gradually became
distinct and separate as they were in England.

Thus, the establishment of the Supreme Court brought recognition, wealth and prestige to the
legal profession. The charters of the Court stipulated that the Chief Justice and three puisne
Judges be English barristers of at least 5 years standing.

The charters empowered the Court to approve, admit and enrol advocates and attorneys to
plead and act on behalf of suitors. They also gave the Court the authority to remove lawyers
from the roll of the Court on reasonable cause and to prohibit practitioners not properly
admitted and enrolled from practising in the Court. The Court maintained the right to admit,
discipline and dismiss attorneys and barristers. Attorneys were not admitted without
recommendation from a high official in England or a Judge in India. Permission to practice in
Court could be refused even to a barrister.

In contrast to the Courts in the presidency towns, the legal profession in the mofussil towns
was established, guided and controlled by legislation. In the Diwani Courts, legal practice was
neither recognized nor controlled, and practice was carried on by vakils and agents. There
were two kinds of agents – a. untrained relatives or servants of the parties in Court and b.
professional pleaders who had training in either Hindu or Muslim law. Bengal Regulation VII
of 1793 was enacted as it was felt that in order to administer justice, Courts, must have
pleading of causes administered by a distinct profession Only men of character and education,
well versed in the Mohamedan or Hindu law and in the Regulations passed by the British
Government, would be admitted pleading in the Courts.

Establishment of the High Courts

In 1862, the High Courts started by the Crown were established at Calcutta, Bombay and
Madras. The High Court Bench was designed to combine Supreme Court and Sudder Court
traditions. Each of the High Courts was given the power to make rules for the qualifications
of proper persons, advocates, vakils and attorneys at Bar. The admission of vakils to practice
before the High Courts ended the monopoly that the barristers had enjoyed in the Supreme
Courts. Additional High Courts were established in Allahabad (1886), Patna (1916), and
Lahore (1919).

There were six grades of legal practice in India after the founding of the High Courts – a)
Advocates, b) Attorneys (Solicitors), c) Vakils of High Courts, d) Pleaders, e) Mukhtars, f)
Revenue Agents. The Legal Practitioners Act of 1879 in fact brought all the six grades of the
profession into one system under the jurisdiction of the High Courts. The Legal Practitioners
Act and the Letters Patent of the High Courts formed the chief legislative governance of legal
practitioners in the subordinate Courts in the country until the Advocates Act, 1961 was
enacted.

In order to be a vakil, the candidate had to study at a college or university, master the use of
English and pass a vakil’s examination. By 1940, a vakil was required to be a graduate with
an LL.B. from a university in India in addition to three other certified requirements. The
certificate should be proof that a. he had passed in the examination b. read in the chamber of
a qualified lawyer and was of a good character.

Original and appellate jurisdiction of the High Court.

The High Courts of the three presidency towns had an original side. The original side included
major civil and criminal matters which had been earlier heard by predecessor Supreme Courts.
On the original side in the High Courts, the solicitor and barrister remained distinct i.e.
attorney and advocate. On the appellate side every lawyer practiced as his own attorney.

Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926.

The Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 was passed to unify the various grades of legal practice
and to provide self-government to the Bars attached to various Courts. The Act required that
each High Court must constitute a Bar Council made up of the Advocate General, four men
nominated by the High Court of whom two should be Judges and ten elected from among the
advocates of the Bar. The duties of the Bar Council were to decide all matters concerning legal
education, qualification for enrolment, discipline and control of the profession. It was
favourable to the advocates as it gave them authority previously held by the judiciary to
regulate the membership and discipline of their profession.
The Advocates Act, 1961 was a step to further this very initiative. As a result of the Advocates
Act, admission, practice, ethics, privileges, regulations, discipline and improvement of the
profession as well as law reform are now significantly in the hands of the profession itself.

Or
 3. Explain the concept of Right to practise and how it is responsible for
an advocate.

RIGHT TO PRACTISE:

Article 19(1) of the Constitution, guarantees certain fundamental rights, subject to the power
of the State to impose restrictions on the exercise of those rights.

FREEDOM TO PRACTISE ANY PROFESSION, OR TO CARRY ON ANY

OCCUPATION, TRADE OR BUSINESS

Article 19 (1) (g) of Constitution of India provides Right to practice any profession or to carry
on any occupation, trade or business to all citizens subject to Art.19 (6) which enumerates the
nature of restriction that can be imposed by the state upon the above right of the citizens. Sub
clause (g) of Article 19 (1) confers a general and vast right available to all persons to do any
particular type of business of their choice. But this does not confer the right to do anything
consider illegal in eyes of law or to hold a particular job or to occupy a particular post of the
choice of any particular person.

RIGHT TO PRACTISE OF AN ADVOCATE:

The expression ‘right to practice’, in context of the legal profession refers to the exclusive right
of persons enrolled as advocates to engage in practice of law before courts and tribunals.

In Re. Lily Isabel Thomas 1964CriLJ724 the Supreme Court equated “right to practice” with
“entitlement to practice”. This right enjoys protection at two levels:

General protection – Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India protects the right of
individuals to practice professions of their choice. As members of the legal profession,
 advocates partake in this right along with members of other trades, occupations and
professions.
Specific Protection – Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961 confers on persons whose
name is enrolled in the registers of State Bar Councils the right to practice before any
court or tribunal in India including the Supreme Court. This section has been recently
made effective through a notification issued by the Central Government. Advocates
have the right to appear, plead, and act on behalf of their clients in any court or tribunal,
and to perform all other functions conferred upon them by law.

Section 29 of the Advocates Act makes the right of practice an exclusive right and precludes
all persons other than advocates from practicing law.

However, this right is subject to certain conditions, such as the advocate being enrolled with
the appropriate Bar Council, complying with the code of conduct for advocates, and possessing
the necessary qualifications and experience as required by law.

4. Explain the rights and privileges of advocates alongside their duties.

Rights and Privileges of advocates in India are described and protected primarily by the
Advocates Act, 1961 and the rules framed by Bar Council of India. The rights and privileges
that given to advocates ensure their independency, hone their skills to practice law with
confidence, and maintain professional autonomy.

Rights of Advocates
Privileges of Advocates
 5. Explain the provision under Indian Constitution which caters to
professionalism.

The provision under the Indian Constitution that caters to professionalism is the right to
practice any profession, occupation, trade or business, which is guaranteed under Article
19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

Article 19(1)(g) states that all citizens have the right to practice any profession, or to carry on
any occupation, trade or business. This provision emphasizes the importance of
professionalism and recognizes the fundamental right of individuals to freely choose and
pursue their chosen profession.

This right, however, is not an absolute right and is subject to reasonable restrictions imposed
by the State in the interest of the general public. These restrictions are mentioned under Article
19(6) and may include considerations such as public order, morality, health, and the protection
of the rights of others.

Furthermore, various legislations have been enacted to regulate and ensure professionalism in
specific professions. For example, the Advocates Act, 1961 governs the legal profession in
India, the Medical Council of India regulates the medical profession, and the Engineering
Council of India oversees the engineering profession. These regulatory bodies establish
professional standards, conduct disciplinary proceedings, and ensure accountability and ethics
within their respective professions.
The jurisdiction of the court concerning the right to practice any profession is primarily in the
High Courts and the Supreme Court of India, which have the power to enforce and interpret
the provisions of the Indian Constitution. Challenges or disputes related to the exercise and
restrictions of the right to practice a profession can be addressed through writ petitions or
constitutional challenges in these courts.

6. REMOVAL OF NAMES UNDER ADVOCATES ACT :

2(c) “cessation of practice” means removal of the name of an advocate from the State roll under
section 26A of the Advocates Act, 1961 (25 of 1961);

Section 26A : Power to remove names from roll

A State Bar Council may remove from the State roll the name of any advocate who is dead or
from whom a request has been received to that effect.

Removal of Names Under Advocates Act, 1961

The process for removing names from the roll of advocates is governed by Section 26A of the
Advocates Act, 1961. This section outlines two scenarios where a State Bar Council can
remove an advocate's name:

1. Death or Request:

The Bar Council can remove the name of any advocate who has passed away.
Additionally, the Bar Council can remove the name of an advocate upon receiving a written
request from them to do so.

2. Disciplinary Proceedings:

It's important to note that Section 26A only deals with these two specific scenarios. Removal
due to professional misconduct or disciplinary action falls under a different process. In such
cases, the Bar Council initiates disciplinary proceedings against the advocate based on specific
complaints and evidence. If found guilty of misconduct, the Bar Council can impose various
penalties, including suspension or permanent removal from the roll of advocates.

l The specific procedure for removal may vary depending on the rules framed by the
respective State Bar Council.
l Removal from the roll of advocates signifies that the individual is no longer entitled to
practice law in that state.
l An advocate whose name has been removed can apply for re-enrolment under certain
conditions and after fulfilling specific requirements set by the Bar Council.

Case: Indure Ltd. v. Deo Raj Guptha BCI TR Case No.58/1993

 7. Smt. Manjula BR and Others vs Karnataka Bar Council

In the case of Smt. Manjula BR and Others vs Karnataka Bar Council (2002), the Karnataka
High Court addressed the issue of whether graduates from a law college affiliated with
Bangalore University but not recognized by the Bar Council of India (BCI) could be enrolled
as advocates in Karnataka.

Key Facts:

The petitioners, Manjula BR and others, had successfully completed their three-year law degree
from Rajiv Gandhi College of Law, Bangalore, which was affiliated with Bangalore University.
However, the BCI had not recognized the affiliation of Rajiv Gandhi College of Law with
Bangalore University.
The petitioners applied for enrolment as advocates with the Karnataka Bar Council, but their
applications were rejected on the grounds that the college was not recognized by the BCI.
Arguments:

Petitioners: They argued that obtaining a law degree from a university-affiliated college was
sufficient for enrolment as an advocate, regardless of BCI recognition. They claimed that the
BCI could only reject their applications if there were deficiencies in their education or if they
did not meet the basic requirements for enrolment.
Karnataka Bar Council and BCI: They contended that BCI recognition of the college's
affiliation was mandatory for enrolment, as per the Advocates Act, 1961. They argued that the
BCI had the authority to regulate the legal profession and ensure the quality of advocates.
Court's Judgment:

The Karnataka High Court ruled in favour of the petitioners.

The Court held that the BCI's non-recognition of the college could not be a ground for rejecting
the petitioners' applications as long as they met the basic requirements for enrolment under the
Advocates Act.
The Court emphasized that the BCI's power to regulate the legal profession did not extend to
overriding the provisions of the Act.
It directed the Karnataka Bar Council to enrol the petitioners as advocates.

8. Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal vs. Union of India and Anr.

INTRODUCTION

The case of Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal vs. Union of India and another, decided on 17th December
2002 by the Supreme Court of India, holds significant importance in the legal landscape of
India. This case revolves around the contentious issue of whether lawyers have the right to go
on strike and the impact of such strikes on the administration of justice. The case sheds light
on the delicate balance between the rights of lawyers to express their grievances and the
fundamental right of litigants to access a speedy trial.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The case centres around the question of whether lawyers have the right to go on strike and the
consequences of such strikes on the administration of justice.

The case’s origins lie in the experiences of Ex-Captain Harish Uppal, a retired army officer
who faced allegations of embezzlement during his posting in Bangladesh in 1972. He was
court-martialled, arrested, and subsequently sentenced to imprisonment, leading to his
dismissal from his post. Despite filing review applications in court, his case faced significant
delays and misplacement of documents due to a strike by a group of advocates.

Harish Uppal’s frustration with the strike-induced delays led him to file a writ petition in the
Supreme Court of India, asserting that strikes by lawyers were unlawful. This case raises
fundamental questions about the rights and responsibilities of lawyers, the impact of strikes on
the judicial system, and the need to strike a balance between safeguarding lawyers’ interests
and ensuring the efficient functioning of the legal system.
ISSUES

1. Whether lawyers have a fundamental right to strike under Article 19(c) of the
Indian Constitution and if so, what are the limitations on this right?
2. Whether the strikes by lawyers are lawful or unlawful, considering their impact
on the administration of justice and the rights of clients.
3. Whether the ban imposed on strikes by lawyers is justified, and if so, what
measures should be taken to balance the interests of lawyers while safeguarding
the functioning of the legal system.
4. What constitutes “rare of rarest cases” in which lawyers may call for strikes, as
mentioned in the Supreme Court’s judgment?
5. How to ensure that the right to speedy trial guaranteed by Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution is not violated due to frequent protests and strikes by
lawyers.
JUDGEMENT

The Court’s Ruling and Reasoning:

In the case of Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal vs. Union of India and another, the Supreme Court of
India delivered a significant ruling on the legality of strikes by lawyers. The court
unequivocally declared that lawyers do not have the right to go on strike or call for the boycott
of court proceedings, not even on a symbolic strike. The reasoning behind this ruling was
rooted in several key arguments.

Firstly, the court emphasized the unique position that lawyers hold as officers of the court.
Lawyers are considered officers of the court and have a duty to ensure the smooth functioning
of the judicial system. Strikes disrupt court proceedings, interfere with the administration of
justice, and put the interests of clients at risk. Therefore, the court found that strikes by lawyers
are incompatible with their role as officers of the court.

Secondly, the court recognized the adverse effects of lawyer strikes on the justice system.
Strikes lead to delays in the trial of cases, resulting in the pendency of cases and the violation
of the fundamental right to a speedy trial guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
This disruption in the functioning of the judiciary was seen as a grave concern.
The court also highlighted the need for lawyers to express their grievances through alternative
means, such as giving press explanations, conducting TV interviews, wearing armbands,
organizing peaceful protests, or engaging with the media. These methods were deemed
acceptable forms of protest that did not interfere with the court’s operations.

In summary, the Supreme Court’s judgment in this case ruled that strikes by lawyers are
unlawful and illicit. Lawyers must ensure the proper functioning of the judicial system and
cannot resort to strikes as a means of protest. Only in the most extreme and rare circumstances,
where the integrity and functioning of the courts are at stake, may lawyers consider alternative
forms of protest. This landmark judgment aimed to balance the interests of the legal profession
with the efficient administration of justice.

LEGAL REASONING

The legal reasoning used by the Supreme Court in arriving at its decision was based on several
key principles, constitutional provisions, and precedents:

Role of Lawyers as Officers of the Court: The court emphasized that lawyers
hold a unique position as officers of the court. This principle recognizes that
lawyers must assist the court in the dispensation of justice and ensure the smooth
functioning of the judicial system. Strikes were seen as a breach of this duty.
Right to a Speedy Trial: The court invoked Article 21 of the Indian Constitution,
which guarantees the right to a speedy trial. Lawyer strikes, by causing delays
in court proceedings, were found to violate this fundamental right.
Freedom of Association: While the Constitution grants the freedom of
association under Article 19c, the court noted that this right is not absolute and
can be subject to reasonable restrictions. The court determined that the
restriction on lawyer strikes was reasonable, considering the unique role of
lawyers as officers of the court.
Past Precedents: The court referred to previous judgments that had upheld the
prohibition on lawyer strikes. These precedents established a legal framework
for the court’s decision.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s decision was grounded in the principles of upholding the
integrity of the judiciary, ensuring a speedy trial, and balancing the right to association with
the smooth functioning of the legal system. It relied on constitutional provisions and past legal
precedents to support its ruling against lawyer strikes.

9. Article 145 in Constitution of India

Article 145 in Constitution of India

145. Rules of court, etc.

(1) Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament, the Supreme Court may from lime
to time, with the approval of the President, make rules for regulating generally the practice and
procedure of the Court including--

(a) rules as to the persons practising before the Court,

(b) rules as to the procedure for hearing appeals and other matters pertaining to appeals
including the time within which appeals to the Court are to be entered;

(c) rules as to the proceedings in the Court for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred
by Part III;

(cc) rules as to the proceedings in the Court under article 139A;

(d) rules as to the entertainment of appeals under sub-clause (c) of clause (1) of article 134;

(e) any judgment pronounced or order made by the Court may be received and rules as to the
conditions the procedure for such review including the time within which applications to the
Court for such review are to be entered;

(f) rules as to the costs of and incidental to any proceedings in the Court and as to the fees to
be charged in respect of proceedings therein;

(g) rules as to the granting of bail;

(h) rules as to stay of proceedings;

(i) rules providing for the summary determination of any appeal which appears to the Court to
be frivolous or vexatious or brought for the purpose of delay;

(j) rules as to the procedure for inquiries referred to in clause (1) of article 317.

(2) Subject to the provisions of clause (3), rules made under this article may fix the minimum
number of Judges who are to sit for any purpose, and may provide for the powers of single
Judges and Division Courts.

(3) The minimum number of Judges who are to sit for the purpose of deciding any case
involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of this Constitution or for the
purpose of hearing any reference under article 143 shall be five:

Provided that, where the Court hearing an appeal under any of the provisions of this Chapter
other than article 132 consists of less than five Judges and in the course of the hearing of the
appeal the Court is satisfied that the appeal involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of this Constitution the determination of which is necessary for the disposal of
the appeal, such Court shall refer the question for opinion to a Court constituted as required by
this clause for the purpose of deciding any case involving such a question and shall on receipt
of the opinion dispose of the appeal in conformity with such opinion.

(4) No judgment shall be delivered by the Supreme Court save in open Court, and no report
shall be made under article 143 save in accordance with an opinion also delivered in open
Court.

(5) No judgment and no such opinion shall be delivered by the Supreme Court save with the
concurrence of a majority of the Judges present at the hearing of the case, but nothing in this
clause shall be deemed to prevent a Judge who docs not concur from delivering a dissenting
judgment or opinion.

10. Right to observe proceedings

The right to observe proceedings, also known as the principle of open justice, is a fundamental
legal principle enshrined in various legal systems worldwide. It encompasses the right of the
public and, in some cases, specific interested parties, to attend and witness legal proceedings.
Advocate’s Right to Enter Any Court and Observe the proceeding is the right of an Advocate
to enter into any courtroom either of the Supreme Court, High Court, or any other Court to
observe any live proceedings under Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

The right to observe proceedings in India is an essential component of a fair and transparent
justice system. It ensures openness, accountability, and public trust in the judicial process. The
right to observe proceedings allows individuals, including the general public, journalists, and
legal professionals, to witness court proceedings and monitor the administration of justice.

The right to observe proceedings in India is primarily guaranteed under the Constitution of
India, which provides for the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression (Article
19(1)(a)), freedom of the press (Article 19(1)(a)), and the right to know (implied from Article
19 and Article 21). These provisions form the constitutional basis for open court proceedings
and the right to observe them.

Constitution of India:
a. Article 19(1)(a): It guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, which includes
the right to receive and impart information. This provision forms the basis for the right to
observe court proceedings and access information related to the administration of justice.
b. Article 19(1)(g): It guarantees the right to practice any profession or to carry on any
occupation, trade, or business. This provision is relevant to legal professionals who have the
right to observe court proceedings as part of their professional duties.

Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973

a. Section 327: This section deals with the power of the court to hold proceedings in open court.
It states that in every trial, the proceedings shall be held in an open court unless the court
decides to hold the trial in camera (in private) in the interest of justice or public morality.
b. Section 327(2): The proviso of section 372 Provided that the presiding Judge may, if he
thinks fit, or on an application made by either of the parties, allow any particular person to have
access to, or be or remain in, the room or building used by the Court.

This principle serves several crucial purposes:

1. Transparency and Accountability: Open proceedings allow public scrutiny of the justice
system, ensuring its fairness and preventing arbitrariness. By witnessing the proceedings, the
public can assess the conduct of judges, lawyers, and parties involved, fostering trust and
confidence in the system.

2. Public Education and Awareness: Public access to proceedings raises awareness about legal
processes and the application of the law. This can contribute to a more informed citizenry and
promote understanding of legal rights and obligations.

3. Deterrence of Misconduct: The knowledge that proceedings are open to public scrutiny
serves as a deterrent against misconduct by those involved. Judges, lawyers, and witnesses are
more likely to adhere to ethical standards if they know their actions are subject to public
observation.

4. Promoting Public Confidence: Openness fosters public confidence in the legitimacy and
fairness of the judicial system. Knowing that proceedings are accessible helps dispel
perceptions of secrecy and bias, reinforcing the system's credibility.

**Scope and Limitations:**

While the right to observe proceedings is significant, it is not absolute. There may be limitations
in specific cases to protect:

* **Privacy of individuals:** Involving sensitive personal information or protecting vulnerable

individuals like children or victims of crime.
* **National security:** In cases involving classified information or matters of state security.
* **Fairness of proceedings:** When public access might prejudice a fair trial, witness
intimidation, or disrupt orderly proceedings.

11.⁠ ⁠Enrollement of advocate

Enrolling as an advocate in India is a regulated process governed by the Bar Council of India
(BCI).
A person who wants to enroll as an advocate needs to qualify some requirements under
Advocates Act, 1961.
PROCEDURE FOR ENROLLMENT:

1 Educational Qualification: To become an advocate, you must have a

Bachelor's degree in Law (LLB) from a recognized university or institution. The LLB course
can be pursued after completing a Bachelor's degree in any discipline.
2 Register with the State Bar Council: After completing the LLB degree, you
need to register yourself with the State Bar Council where you intend to practice law. Each
state in India has its own Bar Council, and registration must be done with the respective State
Bar Council.
 3 Obtain Enrollment Application Form: Visit the office of the State Bar
Council or its official website to obtain the enrollment application form. Alternatively, some
State Bar Councils allow online registration, and you can download the form from their
website.
4 Submit Necessary Documents: Fill the enrollment application form carefully
and submit it to the State Bar Council along with the following documents:
◦ Certified copies of LLB degree and mark sheets
◦ Passport-sized photographs
◦ Character certificate from a recognized authority
◦ Address proof (Aadhar card, voter ID, etc.)
◦ Nationality proof (passport, birth certificate, etc.)
◦ Enrollment fees (as prescribed by the State Bar Council)
5 Verification and Approval: After submitting the enrollment application and
necessary documents, the State Bar Council will verify the authenticity of your LLB degree
and other documents. Once your application is approved, you will be issued a provisional
enrollment certificate.
6 Complete Internship/Training: Before you can be designated as a full-fledged
advocate, you are required to undergo an internship or training under a practicing advocate.
The duration of the internship varies from state to state, but it typically lasts for one year.
7 All India Bar Examination (AIBE): After completing the internship, you need
to clear the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) conducted by the Bar Council of India. The
AIBE is a qualifying exam that tests your knowledge of law and legal ethics.
8 Receive the Certificate of Practice: Once you successfully clear the AIBE,
you will be eligible to receive the Certificate of Practice from the State Bar Council. This
certificate authorizes you to practice law as an advocate in India.

12. Disqualification

A person registered with the Bar Council as an advocate is subjected to disqualification from
the Bar. The provisions of disqualification ensure the decorum and discipline among the
advocates. It also ensures professional ethics in the profession of law and code of conduct in
the court. Section 24(A) of the Advocates Act, 1961 provides the provisions for disqualification
of an advocate.
Kameswara Rao vs Bar Council Of The State Of Andhra in this case, Bala Kameshwara Rao
was retired obligatorily from the post of court master as a disciplinary measure on the premise
of proven misconduct and afterwards listed himself with the bar council of Andhra Pradesh
however his application was rejected by the bar on the ground enumerated in section 24A
clause (a),(b),(c) and amendment respect to section 24A was created by the bar debarring the
advocate from practice under was guilty under the moral Turpitude, same was challenged
before the high court of Andhra Pradesh thus it had been contended by the respondent that bar
council has power to create rules consistent with the act under section 28 of the advocate act,
however high court determined that its ultra-virus section 24A, therefore, its arbitrary, so high
court declared the amendment as unconstitutional.

⁠13. Section 126 and 129 Indian evidence act

126. Professional communications.

In Memon Hajee Haroon Mohomed v. Abdul Karim case, it was provided that in order to
claim privilege under Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 a communication made by
the party to their advocate must be confidential in nature. Also, no privilege will be given to
such communication which is made before the creation of attorney client relationship.

Section 129. Confidential communications with legal advisers

129. No one shall be compelled to disclose to the Court any confidential communication which
has taken place between him and his legal professional adviser, unless he offers himself as a
witness, in which case he may be compelled to disclose any such communications as may
appear to the Court necessary to be known in order to explain any evidence which he has given,
but no others.

D. Veeraseharan v. State of Tamil Nadu 1992 Cr. L.J. 2168 (Mad)

In a recent case, an unsigned and undated letter which was allegedly written by the advocate-
accused to his client-terrorist to remain absconding was held to be professional communication
and not ‘ abetment' and thus could not be used against the advocate

Gurunanak Provisions Stores v. Dalhonumal Savanmal AIR 1994 Guj 31

But in another case, the Gujarat High Court held that disclosure was allowed where the client
desired to obtain decree for money on basis of forged promissory note.

1. Explain the composition of the Bar Council of India and State bar
council.
DUTIES OF AN ADVOCATE:
In case of Satyendra Nararain Singh and Others vs Ram Nath Singh and Others[8], wife
is the judge and husband is the advocate. Court held that the advocate should not appear before
his wife, who is the judge of the court. If he appears before the court, to which his wife is
presiding officer, it becomes his professional misconduct. If he appears before the wife- judge.
It is the duty of the judge to raise the objection. If she fails to object and accepts his appearance,
then it becomes her judicial misconduct.