The Supreme Court opined that the rule of the BCI which mandates a candidate to complete a law course from a college that is recognized/approved by the BCI is a valid rule. The BCI has the power under Section 49 read with Section 24(3)(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961 to frame norms for enrollment as an Advocate.
Brief Facts:
The present appeal is against the order of the Orissa High Court vide which the Bar Council of India (“BCI”) was directed to enroll the writ Petitioner as an Advocate.
Brief Background:
The Writ Petitioner secured a law degree from the college which is not recognized/approved by the BCI. A letter was also sent to the college to enroll students in law courses as students would not be eligible for enrollment as Advocates. Therefore, the application of the writ Petitioner for enrollment was rejected by the BCI.
Observations of the Court:
It was opined that Section 49 read with Section 24(3)(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961 vests BCI with the power to frame norms for enrollment as an Advocate.
The rule of the BCI which mandates a candidate to complete a law course from a college that is recognized/approved by the BCI was held to be valid.
The decision of the Court:
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the BCI was allowed.
Case Title: Bar Council of India v. Rabi Sahu & Anr.
Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 8571 of 2013
Citation: 2023 Latest Caselaw 525 SC
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar
Advocate for Appellant: Adv. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
