BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA versus BONNIE FOI LAW COLLEGE & ORS.

Citation: [2023] 2 S.C.R. 343 · Decided: 10-02-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL · Disposal: Disposed off
cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
343
   [2023] 2 S.C.R. 343
343
BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
v.
BONNIE FOI LAW COLLEGE & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 969 of 2023)
FEBRUARY 10, 2023
[SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SANJIV KHANNA,
ABHAY S. OKA, VIKRAM NATH AND
J.K. MAHESHWARI, JJ.]
Advocates Act, 1961 – ss.49, 24(3)(d) – Bar Council of India
(Training) Rules, 1995 – Pre-enrolment training in terms of the 1995
Rules; Pre-enrolment/Post-enrolment examination, if can be validly
prescribed by the Bar Council of India – Held: Bar Council of India
is not devoid of its jurisdiction in undertaking a pre-enrolment
training course or examination prescribed by it – Wide powers given
to the Bar Council of India u/s.49 r/w s.24(3)(d) are adequate powers
with it under the 1961 Act to provide such norms and Rules – Thus,
the interdict placed by the judgment of Supreme Court in V. Sudeer
v. Bar Council of India on the powers of the Bar Council of India
cannot be sustained and the said case does not lay down the correct
position of law – Questions referred, answered.
Legal Profession:
Role of the Bar Council of India – Discussed.
Standards of legal profession – Various aspects of holding
the All India Bar Examination, suggestions made by the Amicus –
Discussed.
Disposing of the appeal and the petitions, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The object of Parliament enacting the Advocates
Act, 1961 was to consolidate the law relating to legal practitioners.
The prominent role of the Bar Council of India, the apex body, is
apparent from the functions prescribed for the Bar Council of
India under Section 7 of the said Act. Clause (h) of Sub-Section
(1), provides for promotion of legal education and for laying down
standards of such education in consultation with Universities in
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
344
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 2 S.C.R.
India and State Bar Councils. Sub-Clause (m) is in the nature of a
residuary clause, having the widest amplitude to do all other things
necessary for discharging the aforesaid functions. These
provisions do not entrust the Bar Council of India with direct
control of legal education, as primarily legal education is within
the province of the universities. Yet, the Bar Council of India,
being the apex professional body of the advocates, is concerned
with the standards of legal profession and the equipment of those
who seek entry into that profession.  Neither these provisions,
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. Section 24 of the said Act prescribes as to
who are the persons who may be prescribed as Advocates on
State roll. Sub-Section (1) of Section 24 provides conditions
fulfilling which a person shall be qualified to be admitted as an
advocate on a State roll. Sub-Section (3) of Section 24 of the said
Act begins with the non-obstante clause qua Sub-Section (1) by
stating “notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-Section (1)”.
Clause (d) of Sub- Section (3) of Section 24 of the said Act refers
to the entitlement to be enrolled as an Advocate under any Rule
made by the Bar Council of India in this behalf.It is under Clause
(d) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 24 of the said Act that the Bar
Council of India sought to introduce the All India Bar Examination,
which would be uniformly applicable irrespective of the recognised
educational institutions from which a person would complete law
before he was enrolled at the Bar. It is this endeavour of the Bar
Council of India, which came to be assailed in the judgment of
this Court in V. Sudeer and that challenge succeeded. Judgment
in V. Sudeer have to be looked carefully as in the reference order
to the Constitution Bench, the first two questions referred to
this Court really emanate from this judgment i.e. the authority of
the Bar Council of India to provide for pre-enrolment training in
terms of the 1995 Rules and whether pre-enrolment examination
can be prescribed by the Bar Council of India under the said Act.
In terms of the 1995 Rules, trainee advocates are entitled to
appear in court for seeking adjournments and to make mentioning
on instruction of their guides, after their provisional enrolment.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
345
The third question framed for reference refers to Section 49(1)(ah)
of the said Act for providing a post-enrolment examination if the
answers to the first two questions
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.