[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Bar Council Of India vs Uoi on 16 February, 2026
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~7 to 9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 16th February, 2026
Uploaded on:17th February, 2026
~7
+ W.P.(C) 2360/2005 & CM APPL. 1735/2005, CM APPL. 3467/2006,
CM APPL. 3520/2006
BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA .....Petitioner
versus
UOI .....Respondent
~8
+ W.P.(C) 4003/2017 & CM APPL. 17605/2017, CM APPL.
38476/2023
ASSOCIATION OF TAX LAWYERS .....Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
~9
+ W.P.(C) 541/2020
PURAV MIDDHA .....Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Appearance for the Petitioner:-
Mr. Ashish Middha, Adv., Mr. Pushkar Sood Adv. for Pro Bono Counsel
(Civil), DHCLSC, Mr. Rajeev Saxena, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajay Sinha,
Mr. Abhishek Sinha, Ms. Megha Saxena and Ms. Shreya Bhatnagar, Advs,
Ms. Pooja Adv, Ms. Simran kumari Advs.,
Appearance for the Respondent:-
Mr. Ajay Kumar Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Vivek Goyal, Adv., Mr. G.S Chaturvedi
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA W.P.(C) 2360/2005 & Connected matters Page 1 of 4
NEGI
Signing Date:17.02.2026
17:11:52
and Mr. Virat Vibhav Singh, Advs., Ms. Arunima Dwivedi CGSC Ms.
Himanshi Singh, Adv., Ms. Monalisha Pradhan Adv., Ms. Pooja Mehra
Saigal, Sr. Adv. and Mr. Nivesh Dixit, Adv., Mr. Balendu Shekhar, CGSC
with Mr Krishna Chaitanya, Mr. Rajkumar Maurya and Mr. Divyansh Singh
Dev, Advs., Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Panel Counsel(Civil), GNCTD, Ms.
Chandrika Sachdev, Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advs., Mr. Harpreet Singh (Senior
Standing Counsel), Mr. Iqbal Singh Bedi, Ms. Suhani Mathur, Mr. Jatin
Kumar Gaur, Advs.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been through hybrid mode.
2. These petitions raise a very important issue as to whether persons who
are not enrolled as Advocates can appear before Tribunals and plead cases on
behalf of their clients.
3. Such class of persons include Chartered Accountants, Company
Secretaries, Cost Accountants and other persons with similar qualifications
who may or may not be persons possessing LL.B. degree.
4. On the one hand, the stand of the Petitioners- Bar Council of India and
the Association of Tax Lawyers is that under the Advocates Act, 1961, it is
only Advocates who can practice before any Court or Tribunal, or any other
authority and enrolment with the State Bar Council is mandatory for the same.
5. On the other hand, on behalf of the other professionals, including
Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries and Cost Accountants, etc. it is
argued that in terms of section 432 of the Companies Act, 2013, read with
relevant Practice Directions and Rules of the Tribunals, such Tribunals permit
them to represent their clients.
6. Further, Mr. Purav Middha- Petitioner in W.P.(C) 541/2020 has
unfortunately passed away. In his Petition the Constitutional validity of
Section 432 of the Companies Act, 2013, has been challenged.
7. On behalf of the deceased Petitioner, Mr. Ashish Middha is permitted
to implead himself as the Petitioner and either argue the matter himself, or
engage the services of any other advocate for arguing the case.
8. In so far as the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 4003/2017- Association of Tax
Lawyers is concerned, Mr. Rajeev Saxena, ld. Senior Counsel has made
submissions today and has taken the Court through various provisions of the
Advocates Act, 1961, the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 and the Civil
Procedure Code, 1908, and other relevant materials.
9. His submission to be captured in a nutshell is that Section 33 of the
Advocates Act, 1961, does not permit the practice of law to be conducted by
anyone else, except those who are enrolled as Advocates under the Act.
10. It is his further submission that any person who illegally practises in
Courts, Tribunals, or other authorities would be punishable under Section 45
of the Advocates Act, 1961.
11. Further under Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961, only Advocates
can appear before all Courts, Tribunals or any other authority and they are the
only persons who have the right to practise in such forums.
12. The further submission is that before any such Authority, Tribunal or
Forum, which has the power to conduct evidence, only advocates can practice
and conduct such evidence.
14. Mr. Saxena, ld. Senior Counsel prays for some time to prepare the
written note of arguments.
15. Mr. Preetpal Singh, ld. Counsel for the BCI submits that he is out of
station today due to a wedding in the family. He also seeks an adjournment to
enable him to be present physically and argue the matter.
16. Accordingly, at the request of the ld. counsels the matter is adjourned.
17. If any of the counsels wish to file any other written submissions or
modify the existing ones, they are free to do so, at least two weeks before the
next date of hearing. Copies of the written submissions be exchanged.
18. List on 16th March, 2026 at the end of the 'Supplementary list'.
19. It is made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted in these
matters.
20. These matters shall be treated as part-heard.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
MADHU JAIN
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 16, 2026/prg/ss
