Supreme Court of India
SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
- Citation
- 2025 INSC 364
- Decided
- 19 March 2025
- Disposal
- Disposed off
- Bench
- BELA M TRIVEDI
Holding
Advocates do not have an indefeasible right to appear or have their appearances marked unless authorised in accordance with the Supreme Court Rules 2013, and the directions do not infringe any fundamental or statutory rights.
Summary
The Supreme Court Bar Association and the Supreme Court Advocates‑on‑Record Association filed miscellaneous applications seeking clarification and modification of the directions in paragraph 42 of a September 2024 judgment that limited the marking of advocates’ appearances. They argued that the directions prejudice advocates’ voting rights, chamber allotments and eligibility for senior‑advocate designation and that it departs from the long‑standing practice of marking all counsels present. The Court examined the Supreme Court Rules 2013 (as amended 2019), the Advocates Act 1961 and Bar Council of India Rules, holding that the right to appear is conditioned on compliance with these statutory rules and that only an authorised Advocate‑on‑Record (AOR) may file an appearance slip and have appearances recorded. The Court emphasized that court masters must record only those advocates who are physically present and duly authorised, and that a senior‑advocate must not appear without an AOR. Consequently, the Court modified the earlier directions to reiterate the procedural requirements and disposed of the miscellaneous applications.
Issues considered
- Whether an advocate has an indefeasible right to appear for a party or to have his/her appearance marked when not duly authorised under the Supreme Court Rules.
- Whether the directions issued in paragraph 42 impinge upon any legal, fundamental or statutory rights of advocates.
Legislation cited
- Advocates Act, 1961s. 16, s. 30, s. 35, s. 36, s. 49
Headnote
Issue for Consideration The present Miscellaneous Applications have been filed seeking intervention in the matter and seeking clarification/ modification of the directions contained in Para 42 of the Judgment and in Criminal Appeal No. 3883-3884 of 2024. The two questions arise before the Court: (i) whether the Advocates have an indefeasible right to appear for a party or to get their appearances marked for a party, though not duly authorised to appear in the court proceedings and (ii) whether the
Subjects
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA)Supreme Court Advocates‑on‑Record Association (SCAORA)Clarification/modification of directionsAdvocates‑on‑Record appearance before the CourtAdvocates appearance before the CourtVakalatnamaForm‑30Appearance SlipMarking appearances of advocatesRight of advocate to appearFundamental or statutory rights of advocatesArticle 145Supreme Court Rules 2013
Judgment
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 821 : 2025 INSC 364
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr.
v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
(Miscellaneous Application No(s). 3-4 of 2025
In
Criminal Appeal No(s). 3883-3884 of 2024)
19 March 2025
[Bela M. Trivedi* and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
The present Miscellaneous Applications have been filed seeking
intervention in the matter and seeking clarification/ modification
of the directions contained in Para 42 of the Judgment and Order
dated 20.09.2024 in Criminal Appeal No. 3883-3884 of 2024. The
two questions arise before the Court: (i) whether the Advocates
have an indefeasible right to appear for a party or to get their
appearances marked for a party, though not duly authorised to
appear in the court proceedings and (ii) whether the impugned
directions given by the court impinge or affect any of the legal,
fundamental or statutory rights of the Advocates.
Headnotes†
Constitution of India – Art. 145 – Supreme Court Rules,
2013 – Bar Council of India Rules – Advocates Act, 1961 –
The Supreme Court Rules, 2013 as amended by Rules, 2019
having the statutory force, have to be adhered to and complied
with by all the officers of the Court as also the Advocates
practicing in the Supreme Court – For regulating the Practice
and Procedure of the Supreme Court, the following directions
issued:
Held: (i) Where the Vakalatnama is executed in the presence of
the Advocate-on-Record, he shall certify that it was executed in his
presence; (ii) Where the Advocate-on-Record merely accepts the
Vakalatnama which is already duly executed in the presence of a
Notary or an Advocate, he shall make an endorsement thereon that
he has satisfied himself about the due execution of the Vakalatnama;
* Author
822 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
(iii) The Advocate on record shall furnish the details as required
by the Appearance Slip prescribed in Form No.30 through the
link provided on the website as mentioned in the Notice dated
30.12.2022 issued by the Supreme Court; (iv) The respective
Court Masters shall ensure to record appearances in the Record
of Proceedings only of Senior Advocate/AOR/Advocate who are
physically present and arguing in the Court at the time of hearing
of the matter, and one Advocate/AOR each for assistance in Court
to such arguing Senior Advocate/AOR/Advocate, as the case may
be, as required in the Note mentioned at the foot of the said Form
No.30; and (v) If there is any change in the authorisation of the AOR
or of the Senior Advocate or Arguing Advocate by the concerned
party, after the submission of the Appearance Slip prescribed in
Form No.30, it shall be duty of the concerned AOR to submit an
Appearance Slip afresh to the concerned Court Master informing
him about such change, and the concerned Court Master shall
record appearances of such Advocates accordingly in the Record
of Proceedings; (vi) A Senior Advocate shall not appear without
an AOR in the Supreme Court. [Para 24]
Constitution of India – Art. 145 – Supreme Court Rules, 2013 –
Bar Council of India Rules – Advocates Act, 1961 – Right of
Advocates – Apperances before the Court:
Held: 1. Though an Advocate whose name is entered on the roll of
any State Bar Council maintained under the Advocates Act, 1961
is entitled to appear before the Supreme Court, his appearance
would be subject to the said Rules of 2013 framed by the Supreme
Court – The proviso to Rule 1(a) of Order IV of 2013 Rules
restricts an Advocate from addressing the Court for the purpose
of any effective hearing, if his name has been entered on the roll
of any State Bar Council for less than 1 year – Of course, he is
entitled to mention the matter in the Court for limited purpose of
asking time, date, adjournment and similar such orders – As per
Rule 1(b), no Advocate other than the Advocate-on-Record for a
party can appear, plead and address the Court in a matter unless
he is instructed by the Advocate-on-Record or permitted by the
Court. [Para 13]
2. Rule 20 thereof states that no Advocate-on-Record shall authorise
any person whatsoever except another Advocate-on-Record, to act
for him in any case – Rule 2(b) mandates that a Senior Advocate
shall not appear without an Advocate-on-record in the Supreme
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 823
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Court and shall not appear without a junior in any other court in
India – Thus, as per the said Rule so far as Supreme Court is
concerned, a Senior Advocate can not appear without the Advocate
on Record appearing on behalf of a party. [Para 14]
3. Every Vakalatnama has to be executed by the party in presence of
the Advocate-on-Record or in presence of a Notary or an Advocate,
for being sent to the Advocate-on-Record – If the Vakalatnama
was not executed in his presence, the Advocate-on-Record has to
make an endorsement on the Vakalatnama that he has satisfied
himself about the due execution of the Vakalatnama. [Para 15]
4. A right of an Advocate to appear for a party and to practice in
the courts is coupled with the duty to remain present in the court at
the time of hearing, and to participate and conduct the proceedings
diligently, sincerely, honestly and to the best of his ability – Rights
and duties are two sides of the same coin, and they are inherently
connected with each other. [Para 18]
Constitution of India – Art.145 – Supreme Court Rules, 2013 –
Bar Council of India Rules – Advocates Act, 1961 – It is
submitted on behalf of the Applicants Associations that it has
been the practice in the Supreme Court to get appearances
of all counsels marked, who are present in the court for
a particular case, and contributed or assisted the arguing
counsel – Correctness:
Held: It is difficult to accept the submission made on behalf of the
Applicants Associations that it has been the practice in the Supreme
Court to get appearances of all counsels marked, who are present
in the court for a particular case, and contributed or assisted the
arguing counsel – It hardly needs to be stated that no practice
could be permitted to overrule the Statutory Rules, particularly
when the Rules are framed by the Supreme Court in exercise of
the powers conferred under Article 145 of the Constitution – The
said Rules having a statutory force have to be strictly adhered to
and followed by all concerned, that is, by the officers of the Court
including the Court Masters as also the Advocates – There has to
be effective participation or assistance by the concerned Advocate
assisting the Arguing advocate in the case, when the matter is being
conducted in the Court – Casual, formal or ineffective presence
in the Court along with the AOR or arguing Advocate, without due
authorisation by the party concerned, cannot entitle the Advocate
824 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
to insist the Court Master to record his or her appearance in the
Record of Proceedings. [Para 21]
Advocates Act, 1961 – ss.16, 30, 35, 36, 49 – Discussed:
Held: The Advocates Act, 1961 has been enacted to amend and
consolidate the law relating to legal practitioners and to provide
for the constitution of Bar Councils and All India Bar – Section 16
thereof states that there shall be two classes of Advocates, namely,
Senior Advocates and other Advocates – Section 30 thereof, inter
alia, provides that subject to the provisions of the said Act, every
Advocate whose name is entered in the State roll shall be entitled
as of right to practice throughout the territories to which the said Act
extends, in all courts including the Supreme Court – Chapter V of
the said Act pertains to the conduct of the Advocates, and Section
35 and 36 empower the State Bar Council and the Bar Council of
India to take disciplinary actions and punish the Advocate who has
been found guilty of professional and other misconduct – Section
49 thereof empowers the Bar Council of India to make rules for
discharging its functions under the said Act and in particular for
the matters prescribed therein. [Para 8]
Case Law Cited
Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India [2023] 5 SCR 434 : (2023)
8 SCC 1; Gopal Jha v. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India [2018] 13
SCR 517 : (2019) 13 SCC 161; Supreme Court Bar Association
and Others v. B.D. Kaushik [2011] 15 SCR 736 : (2011) 13 SCC
774; Bar of Indian Lawyers Through Its President Jasbir Singh
Malik Etc. v. D.K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable
Diseases and Another, etc. [2024] 6 SCR 484 : (2024) 8 SCC
430 – referred to.
List of Acts
Constitution of India; Supreme Court Rules, 2013; Bar Council of
India Rules; Advocates Act, 1961.
List of Keywords
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA); Supreme Court Advocates-
on-Record Association (SCAORA); Clarification/ modification of the
directions; Advocates-on-Record appearance before the Court;
Advocates appearance before the Court; Vakalatnama; Form-30
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 825
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
prescribed in the Fourth Schedule of Supreme Court Rules, 2013;
Appearance Slip; Marking the appearances of the Advocates
before the Court; Right of advocate to appear; Fundamental or
statutory rights of the Advocates; Law relating to legal practitioners;
Article 145 of the Constitution of India; Appearance Slip prescribed
in From 30; Recording of appearances of Advocates.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Miscellaneous Application
No(s). 3-4 of 2025
In
Criminal Appeal No(s). 3883-3884 of 2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.09.2024 of the Supreme
Court of India in Crl.A. No. 3883 and 3884 of 2024
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Petitioners:
ANS Nadkarni, Sr. Adv., Ms. Rachana Srivastava, Vipin Nair,
Vikrant Yadav, Nikhil Jain, Kaustubh Shukla, S.K. Tomar, Mukesh
Kumar Singh, Amit Sharma.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Bela M. Trivedi, J.
1. The Miscellaneous Applications have been filed jointly by the Supreme
Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-
on-Record Association (SCAORA) seeking intervention in the matter
and seeking clarification/ modification of the directions contained in
Para 42 of the Judgment and Order dated 20.09.2024 in Criminal
Appeal No. 3883-3884 of 2024. The said Para 42 reads as under: -
“42. In view of the said Notice/Circular dated 30.12.2022
and in furtherance of the afore-stated order passed by the
Coordinate Bench, it is directed that the Advocates-on-
Record may mark the appearances of only those Advocates
who are authorized to appear and argue the case on the
826 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
particular day of hearing. Such names shall be given by
the Advocate on Record on each day of hearing of the
case as instructed in the Notice. If there is any change in
the name of the arguing Advocate, it shall be duty of the
concerned Advocate-on-Record to inform the concerned
Court Master in advance or at the time of hearing of the
case. The concerned Officers/Court Masters shall act
accordingly.”
2. This Court on 23.01.2025, had passed the following Order in the
captioned Miscellaneous Applications: -
“O R D E R
“IA No. 239214/2024, IA No. 283438/2024, and IA No.
283437/2024
1. These applications have been filed by the applicants-
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) And Supreme
Court Advocates On-Record Association (SCAORA)
in Miscellaneous Application Nos. 3-4/2025, seeking
permission to intervene in the matter and seeking
clarification/ modification of the judgment dated 20.09.2024
passed in Crl. Appeal Nos.3883-3884 of 2024. Following
prayers have been sought in the M.A. No.3-4/2025.
“a) Modify order dated 20.09.2024 passed by this
Hon’ble Court in the CrI. A. No. 3883-3884 of
2024 to the extent that the investigation carried
out by the CBI in furtherance on the directions
of this Hon’ble Court, shall be independent and
not influenced by the observations made in the
instant matter especially Paragraphs 24, 25,
30 and 32 of the Judgment dated 20.09.2024;
b) Modify/Clarify the directions passed in
Para 42 of the order to the extent that the names
of those Advocates should also be included
who have assisted the Advocate on Record in
preparation of the case and/or have briefed the
arguing counsel or Senior Advocate and/or are
from the office of the Senior Advocate assisting
on the matter.”
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 827
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
2. At the outset, in response to the query put forth by
the Court as to what locus standi the applicants have
to file these Interlocutory Applications/ Miscellaneous
Applications in a disposed of Criminal Appeals being
Crl. Appeal Nos.3883-3884/2024, the learned Senior
Advocate, Mr. Kapil Sibal, appearing for the applicants
fairly conceded that in normal circumstances the applicants
would not have the locus standi, however he earnestly
urged to permit him to address the Court, submitting that
both the applicants – Associations are working for the
welfare of the Bar, and the judgment in question has a
wide repercussions on the Advocates practicing in the
Supreme Court and on the legal profession as a whole.
3. He further submitted that so far as prayer clause (a)
sought in M.A. is concerned, it may be clarified that the
observations made in the judgment are prima facie and
may not influence the CBI in carrying out the investigation
independently.
4. Since, Mr. Kapil Sibal, is not only the Senior Advocate
but is also the President of the SCBA, we permitted him
to address the Court without being technical as to the
locus standi of the applicants. Considering his earnest
request, however without diluting the tenor and effect
of the directions given and observations made in the
judgment dated 20.09.2024, we may clarify that the CBI
shall carry out the Inquiry/ Investigation independently and
in accordance with law and register the case against the
persons who are found involved and responsible for the
commission of the alleged crimes.
5. So far as the prayer clause (b) is concerned, learned
Senior Advocate, Mr. Kapil Sibal, submitted that the
Members of both the Associations i.e. SCBA and
SCAORA, are committed to the cause of justice and are
also committed to promote professional competence and
maintain professional integrity, and to prevent unethical
practices affecting the legal profession. He submitted that
on the next date of hearing, the applicants shall come
out with some concrete proposal for taking steps/ action
for the promotion and improvement of the professional
828 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
competence, which in turn would help in maintaining the
professional integrity for the larger cause of justice.
6. In view of the said submission, list the applications
before the same combination of Bench on 30.01.2025 at
02:00 p.m.”
3. In view of the above Order, the Court had allowed the Applicants-
Associations to make their submissions, without being technical
about their locus standi to intervene and to file these Miscellaneous
Applications in the disposed of matter.
4. On 13.02.2025, Ms. Rachana Srivastava, the Vice President of SCBA,
and the other Representatives of the SCBA and of SCAORA, made
oral submissions and also submitted written joint submissions inter
alia as under: -
i. The directions contained in the Judgment and Order dated
20.09.2024 are likely to seriously prejudice the rights of the
members of the said Associations including their voting rights,
rights in the allotment of chambers and their right for being
considered for the designation as Senior Advocate etc.
ii. As per the Guidelines for the designation of Senior Advocates
2023, an Advocate is required to furnish a particular number of
reported/ unreported Judgments in the last 5 years in cases, in
which he has appeared as an Arguing Counsel and Assisting
Counsel. The decision in case of Indira Jaising vs. Supreme
Court of India1, has been relied upon to highlight the role of
a lead counsel and assisting counsel.
iii. Number of appearances of an Advocate is also one of the criteria
for determining the eligibility for allocation of chambers in the
premises of the Supreme Court. In this regard, the decision
in case of Gopal Jha vs. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India2,
has been relied upon.
iv. As per Rule 5 of the Rules and Regulations of SCBA, a member
is eligible to vote only if he is a regular member of the Association,
for which he should have appearance in the Supreme Court
either as a lead Counsel in at least 5 matters in each year of
1 (2023) 8 SCC 1
2 (2019) 13 SCC 161
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 829
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
the 2 years period or as a Junior Advocate appearing with the
Senior Advocate/ Advocate-on-Record in at least 20 matters in
each year of the 2 years period. As per Supreme Court Bar
Association and Others vs. B.D. Kaushik3, only Advocates
practising regularly in the Supreme Court are allowed to cast
vote or contest the elections of the Association.
v. Form-30 prescribed in the Fourth Schedule of Supreme Court
Rules, 2013, requires an Appearance Slip to be submitted by
the Advocate-on-Record for marking the appearances of the
Advocates before the Court. It has always been an accepted
rule, norm and practice in the Supreme Court to mark the
appearances of all the Counsels who are present before the
Court for a particular case and have contributed for proper
adjudication of that case.
vi. As per Order III Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, a pleader
has a right to appear on behalf of the party before any court.
vii. By not recording the appearances of the assisting Advocates,
there will be an adverse impact on the career progression of
the Junior Advocates.
5. At the outset, it may be noted that the Court was constrained to
give the impugned directions as a part of corrective measures, in
the judgment and order dated 20.09.2024, as the court had found
not only a misuse and abuse of process of law, but also a fraud on
the court having been prima facie committed at the instance of the
party-litigants and their advocates involved in the case. The other
reason for giving such direction was also that the Court had noticed a
very strange practice being followed in the Supreme Court regarding
marking the appearances of number of advocates for a party, without
anybody verifying or certifying whether they all are authorised to
appear for that party or not. In almost all matters, whether simple
or complicated, a number of appearances of Advocates would
be shown in the Record of Proceedings, running into pages and
pages, without any verification as to whether such advocates were
in fact present in the Court or were in fact authorised to appear for
a particular party in the case.
3 (2011) 13 SCC 774
830 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
6. Two questions therefore arise before the Court: (i) whether the
Advocates have an indefeasible right to appear for a party or to get
their appearances marked for a party, though not duly authorised
to appear in the court proceedings? and (ii) whether the impugned
directions given by the court impinge or affect any of the legal,
fundamental or statutory rights of the Advocates?
7. Before adverting to the above questions, it would be apt to refer to
some of the relevant provisions contained in The Advocates Act, 1961,
The Bar Council of India Rules and The Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
8. The Advocates Act, 1961 has been enacted to amend and consolidate
the law relating to legal practitioners and to provide for the constitution
of Bar Councils and All India Bar. Section 16 thereof states that there
shall be two classes of Advocates, namely, Senior Advocates and
other Advocates. Section 30 thereof, inter alia, provides that subject to
the provisions of the said Act, every Advocate whose name is entered
in the State roll shall be entitled as of right to practice throughout the
territories to which the said Act extends, in all courts including the
Supreme Court. Chapter V of the said Act pertains to the conduct
of the Advocates, and Section 35 and 36 empower the State Bar
Council and the Bar Council of India to take disciplinary actions and
punish the Advocate who has been found guilty of professional and
other misconduct. Section 49 thereof empowers the Bar Council of
India to make rules for discharging its functions under the said Act
and in particular for the matters prescribed therein.
9. The Bar Council of India in exercise of its rule making power under
the Advocates Act, 1961 has framed the Rules called ‘The Bar Council
of India Rules’. The said Rules have been divided into nine parts.
Part VI pertains to the Rules governing the Advocates. Chapter I of
the said part VI lays down the restrictions on Senior Advocates in
the matter of their practise of the profession of law as mentioned in
Section 30 of the Advocates Act. Chapter II of part VI pertains to the
standards of professional conduct and etiquette to be followed by the
Advocates. The said Chapter lays down the Duties of an Advocate
to the court, to the client, to the opponent, and to the colleagues.
Chapter IV of Part VI also prescribes the form of dresses or robes
to be worn by the Advocates.
10. It may further be noted that under Article 145 of the Constitution
of India, the Supreme Court is empowered, with the approval of
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 831
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
the President, to make Rules for regulating generally the practice
and procedure of the Court including the Rules as to the persons
practicing before the Court. Accordingly, the Supreme Court has
framed the Supreme Court Rules 2013, which came to be amended
by the Supreme Court/ Amendment Rules, 2019 (hereinafter referred
to as the said Rules).
11. Order IV of the said Rules 2013, pertains to the “Advocates.”
Relevant parts of the said Rules contained in Order IV are reproduced
hereunder: -
“1. (a) Subject to the provisions of these rules an advocate
whose name is entered on the roll of any State Bar Council
maintained under the Advocates Act, 1961 (25 of 1961)
as amended shall be entitled to appear before the Court:
Provided that an advocate whose name is entered on
the roll of any State Bar Council maintained under the
Advocates Act, 1961 (25 of 1961), for less than one year,
shall be entitled to mention matters in Court for the limited
purpose of asking for time, date, adjournment and similar
such orders, but shall not be entitled to address the Court
for the purpose of any effective hearing:
Provided further that the Court may, if it thinks desirable
to do so for any reason, permit any person to appear and
address the Court in a particular case.
(b) No Advocate other the Advocate-on-Record for a party
shall appear, plead and address the court in the matter
unless he is instructed by the Advocate-on-Record or
permitted by the Court.”
(c) ……………………
2. (a) The Chief Justice and the Judges may, with the
consent of the advocate, designate an advocate as senior
advocate if in their opinion by virtue of his ability, standing
at the Bar or special knowledge or experience in law the
said advocate is deserving of such distinction
(b) A senior advocate shall not-
(i) file a vakalatnama or act in any Court or Tribunal in India;
832 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
(ii) appear without an advocate-on-record in the Court or
without a junior in any other Court or Tribunal in India;
(iii) accept instructions to draw pleadings or affidavit, advise
on evidence or do any drafting work of an analogous kind
in any Court or Tribunal in India or undertake conveyancing
work of any kind whatsoever but this prohibition shall
not extend to settling any such matter as aforesaid in
consultation with a junior;
(iv) accept directly from a client any brief or Instructions
to appear in any Court or Tribunal in India.
Explanation. - …………………………
3 to 4 …………
5. No advocate shall be qualified to be registered as an
advocate-on-record unless: -
(i) his name is, and has been borne on the roll of any
State Bar Council for a period of not less than four years
on the date of commencement of his training as provided
hereinafter:
(ii) to (iv)………
6……….
7. (a) …………
(b) (i) Where the vakalatnama is executed in the presence
of the Advocate-on-Record, he shall certify that it was
executed in his presence.
(ii) Where the Advocate-on-Record merely accepts
the vakalatnama which is already duly executed in the
presence of a Notary or an advocate, he shall make an
endorsement thereon that he has satisfied himself about
the due execution of the vakalatnama.
(c) No advocate other than an advocate-on-record shall be
entitled to file an appearance or act for a party in the Court.
(d) & (e) …..…………………
8-9 ………………………….
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 833
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
10. When, on the complaint of any person or otherwise,
the Court is of the opinion that an advocate-on-record
has been guilty of misconduct or of conduct unbecoming
of an advocate-on-record, the Court may make an order
removing his name from the register of advocates on record
either permanently or for such period as the Court may
think fit and the Registrar shall thereupon report the said
fact to the Bar Council of lndia and to State Bar Council
concerned:
Provided ……………………
11 to 19 …………………………….
20. No advocate-on-record shall authorise any person
whatsoever except another advocate-on-record, to act
for him in any case.”
12. So far as Appearance Slip is concerned, the said Rules have
prescribed it in the Form No.30 in the Fourth Schedule, appended
to the said Rules. The said Form No. 30 alongwith its Note is
reproduced as under: -
“No. 30
APPEARANCE SLIP
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Date of Listing………
Court No……./In Chambers Item No………..
Case No..............
Name of Advocate Enrolment No.
1. ………… ………….
2. ………… ………….
Appearing for
Petitioner Respondent
No. No.
……………………….
[Signature of AOR]
……………………….
[Name of AOR]
834 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Note. –
Court Master shall ensure to record appearance in the
Record of Proceedings only of Senior Advocate/ AOR/
Advocate who are physically present and arguing in the
Court at the time of hearing of the matter and one Advocate/
AOR each for assistance in Court to such arguing Senior
Advocate/ AOR/ Advocate, as the case may be.”
13. From the above stated statutory provisions, what is deducible is that
the Supreme Court in exercise of the powers conferred by Article
145 of the Constitution of India and all other powers enabling it in
this behalf, has made with the approval of the President, the Rules
for regulating generally the practice and procedure of the Court,
including the Rules as to persons practicing before the Court.
Therefore, though an Advocate whose name is entered on the roll
of any State Bar Council maintained under the Advocates Act, 1961
is entitled to appear before the Supreme Court, his appearance
would be subject to the said Rules of 2013 framed by the Supreme
Court. The proviso to Rule 1(a) of Order IV restricts an Advocate
from addressing the Court for the purpose of any effective hearing,
if his name has been entered on the roll of any State Bar Council
for less than 1 year. Of course, he is entitled to mention the matter
in the Court for limited purpose of asking time, date, adjournment
and similar such orders. As per Rule 1(b), no Advocate other than
the Advocate-on-Record for a party can appear, plead and address
the Court in a matter unless he is instructed by the Advocate-on-
Record or permitted by the Court.
14. Rule 20 thereof states that no Advocate-on-Record shall authorise
any person whatsoever except another Advocate-on-Record, to act
for him in any case. Rule 2(b) mandates that a Senior Advocate shall
not appear without an Advocate-on-record in the Supreme Court and
shall not appear without a junior in any other court in India. Thus, as
per the said Rule so far as Supreme Court is concerned, a Senior
Advocate can not appear without the Advocate on Record appearing
on behalf of a party.
15. It is pertinent to note that as per Rule 7(c) no Advocate other than
the Advocate-on-Record is entitled to file an appearance or act
for a party in the Court, and Rule 7(a) requires an Advocate-on-
Record to file his memorandum of appearance on behalf of a party
accompanied by Vakalatnama duly executed by the party. Where
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 835
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
the Vakalatnama is executed in the presence of the Advocate-on-
Record, he shall certify that it was executed in his presence. If the
Advocate-on-Record has merely accepted the Vakalatnama, which
was already executed in the presence of a Notary or an Advocate,
he has to make an endorsement thereon that he has satisfied himself
about the due execution of the Vakalatnama. Meaning thereby, every
Vakalatnama has to be executed by the party in presence of the
Advocate-on-Record or in presence of a Notary or an Advocate, for
being sent to the Advocate-on-Record. If the Vakalatnama was not
executed in his presence, the Advocate-on-Record has to make
an endorsement on the Vakalatnama that he has satisfied himself
about the due execution of the Vakalatnama. This Rule 7 assumes
significance more particularly in the Supreme Court, in as much
as, many a times, the Advocates-on-Record would be receiving the
Vakalatnama already executed by the party, who might be staying at
a far away place. In that case, it would be incumbent on the part of
Advocate-on-Record, before filing his Memorandum of appearance
on behalf of such party that the Vakalatnama received by him was
duly executed in presence of a Notary or other Advocate and to
make an endorsement in that regard.
16. Rule 10 of the said Order IV also assumes significance in case
when an accountability is required to be fixed on the Advocate-on-
Record and when, in the opinion of the Court, he has been guilty of
misconduct or of conduct unbecoming of an Advocate-on-Record.
17. It is noticed by us that in many cases the Advocate-on-Record would
merely lend his/her name without any further participation in the
proceedings of the case. The Advocate-on-Record would be seldom
found present along with the Senior Advocate. The Appearance
Slip in the prescribed Form No.30 would also not have been given
showing the correct appearances. We cannot resist ourselves from
observing that every Vakalatnama or Memorandum of Appearance
filed in a case by the Advocate on Record carries lot of responsibility
and accountability.
18. A right of an Advocate to appear for a party and to practice in the
courts is coupled with the duty to remain present in the court at the
time of hearing, and to participate and conduct the proceedings
diligently, sincerely, honestly and to the best of his ability. Rights
and duties are two sides of the same coin, and they are inherently
connected with each other.
836 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
19. This Court in case of Bar of Indian Lawyers Through Its President
Jasbir Singh Malik Etc. Vs. D.K. Gandhi PS National Institute
of Communicable Diseases and Another, etc.4, while holding that
the legal profession is sui generis i.e. unique in nature and cannot
be compared with other professions, also held that a service hired
or availed of an Advocate, is a service under “a contract of personal
service” and therefore would fall within the exclusionary part of the
“service” contained in Section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act,
2019. On the right of an Advocate to practice, and to act for any
person in the court, it was observed as under: -
“49. A conjoint reading of the provisions contained in
Order III CPC and Chapter IV of Advocates Act pertaining
to right to practise, there remains no shadow of doubt that
an advocate whose name has been entered in the State
roll is entitled as of right to practise in all Courts, however
he can act for any person in any Court only when he is
appointed by such person by executing the document called
“Vakalatnama.” Such Advocate has certain authorities by
virtue of such “Vakalatnama” but at the same time has
certain duties too, i.e. the duties to the courts, to the client,
to the opponent and to the colleagues as enumerated in
the Bar Council of India Rules.
50. In this regard, this Court in Himalayan Cooperative
Group Housing Society vs. Balwan Singh and Others
has made very apt observations, which are reproduced
hereunder: -
22. Apart from the above, in our view lawyers
are perceived to be their client’s agents. The
law of agency may not strictly apply to the
client-lawyer’s relationship as lawyers or agents,
lawyers have certain authority and certain
duties. Because lawyers are also fiduciaries,
their duties will sometimes be more demanding
than those imposed on other agents. The
authority-agency status affords the lawyers to
act for the client on the subject-matter of the
4 (2024) 8 SCC 430
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 837
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
retainer. One of the most basic principles of the
lawyer-client relationship is that lawyers owe
fiduciary duties to their clients. As part of those
duties, lawyers assume all the traditional duties
that agents owe to their principals and, thus,
have to respect the client’s autonomy to make
decisions at a minimum, as to the objectives of
the representation. Thus, according to generally
accepted notions of professional responsibility,
lawyers should follow the client’s instructions
rather than substitute their judgment for that
of the client. The law is now well settled that a
lawyer must be specifically authorised to settle
and compromise a claim, that merely on the
basis of his employment he has no implied
or ostensible authority to bind his client to a
compromise/settlement. To put it alternatively
that a lawyer by virtue of retention, has the
authority to choose the means for achieving the
client’s legal goal, while the client has the right
to decide on what the goal will be. If the decision
in question falls within those that clearly belong
to the client, the lawyer’s conduct in failing to
consult the client or in making the decision for
the client, is more likely to constitute ineffective
assistance of counsel.”
20. So far as Appearance Slip is concerned, the “Note” mentioned at the
foot of Form No.30 in the Fourth Schedule appended to the said Rules
2013, requires the Court Master to ensure to record appearances in
the Record of Proceedings only of Senior Advocate/ AOR/ Advocate
who is physically present and arguing in the Court at the time of
hearing of the matter and one Advocate/ AOR each for assistance
in the Court to such arguing Senior Advocate/ AOR/ Advocate, as
the case may be. This means that the Court Master is required to
record appearances in the Record of Proceedings only of (i) Senior
Advocate or AOR or Advocate who is physically present and arguing
in the Court on behalf of a party at the time of hearing of the matter
and (ii) one Advocate or AOR each for assistance in the Court to
such arguing Senior Advocate or AOR or Advocate as the case
838 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
may be. Therefore, along with the arguing Senior Advocate or AOR
or Advocate appearing for a party, further additional appearance of
only one Advocate or AOR as the case may be, who is assisting in
the matter, could be recorded. Of course, any subsequent change in
the engagement of the AOR or the Senior Advocate or the Arguing
Advocate by the party, may be intimated by the concerned AOR by
submitting an Appearance Slip afresh to the concerned Court Master,
and the concerned Court Master shall have to mark the appearances
of the Advocates accordingly in the Record of Proceedings.
21. It is difficult to accept the submission made on behalf of the Applicants
Associations that it has been the practice in the Supreme Court to get
appearances of all counsels marked, who are present in the court for
a particular case, and contributed or assisted the arguing counsel.
It hardly needs to be stated that no practice could be permitted to
overrule the Statutory Rules, particularly when the Rules are framed
by the Supreme Court in exercise of the powers conferred under
Article 145 of the Constitution. The said Rules having a statutory force
have to be strictly adhered to and followed by all concerned, that is,
by the officers of the Court including the Court Masters as also the
Advocates. There has to be effective participation or assistance by
the concerned Advocate assisting the Arguing advocate in the case,
when the matter is being conducted in the Court. Casual, formal
or ineffective presence in the Court along with the AOR or arguing
Advocate, without due authorisation by the party concerned, cannot
entitle the Advocate to insist the Court Master to record his or her
appearance in the Record of Proceedings.
22. The submission made on behalf of the Applicants-Associations that
the impugned directions given by the Court would have an adverse
impact on the rights of the Advocates to vote, to be considered for
the allotment of chambers in the Supreme Court premises and for the
designation as Senior Advocate, also has no force. In this regard, it
may be noted that the issues with regard to allotment of chambers
in the Supreme Court premises and about the voting rights of the
Advocates in the elections of Supreme Court Bar Association have
been raised and considered by this Court in various judgments. In
Gopal Jha case (supra), this Court had reiterated that there is no
fundamental right or statutory right of an Advocate to have an allotment
of chamber in any court premises, and that it is only a facility which
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 839
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. v.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
is provided in the court premises. It has been further observed that
the members of SCAORA or other similarly situated persons who
are members of SCBA can make only a request to the Chambers
committee constituted under the Supreme Court Lawyers’ Chambers
(Allotment and Occupancy) Rules framed by the Supreme Court on
administrative side, for the allotment of chambers within the compound
of Supreme Court. The said Rules govern the procedure and the
eligibility criteria for allotment of chambers which are binding to all.
23. The issues with regard to the voting right and the right to contest
elections of SCBA, have also been crystallised by this Court in
Supreme Court Bar Association and Others (supra), in which it has
been held inter alia that right to vote or to contest election is neither
a fundamental right nor a common law right, but is purely a statutory
right governed by the Statutes/Rules/Regulations. We therefore need
not elaborate any further on the issues raised, except to observe
that members of the Applicants-Associations are bound by the Rules
and Regulations with regard to right to the allotment of Chambers
and with regard to the right to vote or right to contest elections of
the Bar Association, as also they are bound by the Supreme Court
Rules, 2013 framed under Article 145 of the Constitution of India.
24. In the aforesaid premises, we are of the opinion that the said Supreme
Court Rules, 2013 as amended by Rules, 2019 having the statutory
force, have to be adhered to and complied with by all the officers of
the Court as also the Advocates practicing in the Supreme Court. The
Supreme Court being the highest court of the country, the practice
and procedure being followed in the Supreme Court proceedings
by the Advocates and Officers of the Supreme Court have to be
strictly in accordance with the Statutory Rules framed by it, and
not dehors the said Rules. Hence, keeping in view the said Rules
framed in exercise of the powers conferred under Article 145 of the
Constitution of India, and for regulating the Practice and Procedure
of the Supreme Court, it is directed that –
(i) Where the Vakalatnama is executed in the presence of the
Advocate-on-Record, he shall certify that it was executed in
his presence.
(ii) Where the Advocate-on-Record merely accepts the Vakalatnama
which is already duly executed in the presence of a Notary or an
840 [2025] 3 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Advocate, he shall make an endorsement thereon that he has
satisfied himself about the due execution of the Vakalatnama.
(iii) The Advocate on record shall furnish the details as required
by the Appearance Slip prescribed in Form No. 30 through the
link provided on the website as mentioned in the Notice dated
30.12.2022 issued by the Supreme Court;
(iv) The respective Court Masters shall ensure to record appearances
in the Record of Proceedings only of Senior Advocate/AOR/
Advocate who are physically present and arguing in the Court
at the time of hearing of the matter, and one Advocate/AOR
each for assistance in Court to such arguing Senior Advocate/
AOR/Advocate, as the case may be, as required in the Note
mentioned at the foot of the said Form No. 30; and
(v) If there is any change in the authorisation of the AOR or of
the Senior Advocate or Arguing Advocate by the concerned
party, after the submission of the Appearance Slip prescribed in
Form No. 30, it shall be duty of the concerned AOR to submit
an Appearance Slip afresh to the concerned Court Master
informing him about such change, and the concerned Court
Master shall record appearances of such Advocates accordingly
in the Record of Proceedings.
(vi) A Senior Advocate shall not appear without an AOR in the
Supreme Court.
25. Subject to the above modification in the directions contained in
para 42 of the Judgement dated 20.09.2024, the Miscellaneous
Applications stand disposed of.
26. The Office shall do the needful for the due compliance of the directions
contained in this order.
Result of the case: Miscellaneous applications disposed of.
†
Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA)"Sign in to search