Supreme Court Explains Criteria For Senior Advocate Designation, Says Having 'Long Practice' Cannot Be A Rational Criterion
The Supreme Court has explained the qualifications necessary for an advocate to be designated as Senior Advocate under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, which governs the process of designation of Senior Advocates.Section 16 provides for two classes of advocates — Senior Advocates and other Advocates. Sub-section (2) of the provision states that an advocate may be designated as a...
The Supreme Court has explained the qualifications necessary for an advocate to be designated as Senior Advocate under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, which governs the process of designation of Senior Advocates.
Section 16 provides for two classes of advocates — Senior Advocates and other Advocates. Sub-section (2) of the provision states that an advocate may be designated as a Senior Advocate with his consent if the Supreme Court or a High Court opines that, by virtue of his ability, standing at the Bar, or special knowledge or experience in law, he is deserving of such distinction.
A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, and Justice SVN Bhatti held that standing at the Bar is a mixture of several qualities including, “(i) integrity (ii) respect (iii) confidence (iv) dependability (v) honesty (vi) communication skills (vii) confidence and (viii) commitment to administration of justice and rule of law.”
The Court elaborated that an Advocate with standing at the Bar is one who is fair in court, respectful to judges and fellow Advocates, maintains courtroom decorum, prioritizes duty to the court over client advocacy, upholds professional ethics, mentors juniors, engages in pro bono work, and is respected within the legal fraternity.
“Some of the qualities which give an Advocate a standing at the Bar are as follows:
(a) He/she is always fair while conducting cases before the Courts;
(b) His/her behaviour with the Judges and other members of the Bar is respectful;
(c) He/she maintains decorum while conducting cases before the Court;
(d) He/she always acts first as an officer of the Court and, thereafter, a mouthpiece of his/her client;
(e) He/she follows the highest standards of professional etiquette and ethics;
(f) He/she acts as a mentor to the junior Advocates;
(g) He/she does pro bono work; and
(h) He/she carries respect in the legal fraternity.”
The Court further stated that while honesty and integrity are fundamental and must be possessed by every Advocate, they alone do not qualify someone for designation as a Senior Advocate.
The Court noted that section 16(2) was amended in 1973 replacing the phrase “experience and standing at the Bar” with the expression “ability, standing at the Bar or special knowledge or experience in law,” effective from January 31, 1974.
The Court emphasized that the standards for Senior Advocates must be significantly higher than for other Advocates. The Court highlighted the three criteria under the Act: ability, standing at the Bar, and special knowledge or experience in law.
On standing at the Bar, the Court observed the criteria doesn't relate to length of practice. "There can be many members of the Bar who have a long presence in the profession. There are many members of the Bar who continue to practice for a long time, though their appearances are minimal. Only the number of years spent in practice cannot be a major criterion for designation by any stretch of imagination.... Therefore, in our view, assigning points on the basis of experience in terms of the number of years is something which will require reconsideration as it does not serve the object sought to be achieved by this Court."
On ability, the Court observed that this includes not only a sound understanding of the law, particularly in the branches the Advocate practices, but also advocacy skills essential for effective case presentation.
“When the provision talks about ability, it will include very sound knowledge of law and especially the branches of law in which the Advocate is practicing. The ability will also include, apart from sound knowledge of law, skills of advocacy, which are required to effectively conduct a case. It will include mastery over the art of cross-examination in case of Advocates practicing on the original sides of the High Court or Trial and District/Sessions Courts. Writing articles and commentaries on law will be part of ability. Capacity to rationally critique judicial decisions will be a facet of ability”, the Court stated.
On the criteria of special knowledge of law, the Court explained that expertise in specialized legal fields such as Arbitration, Insolvency and Bankruptcy, Company Law, Intellectual Property Law, and Tax Law also qualifies an Advocate for designation.
The Court stressed that advocates in Trial and District Courts or before specialized tribunals may possess qualifications under Section 16(2), including exceptional drafting skills and mastery of cross-examination. The Court further observed that designating only those practicing in the higher courts would render Section 16(2) arbitrary and potentially violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
“The Advocates practicing in Trial/District Courts may have extraordinary skills in drafting pleadings and conducting cross examination. Considering the very object of the Advocates Act, we must note that an Advocate practicing in Trial and District Courts cannot be treated as inferior to an Advocate who practices in this Court or High Courts. Even such an Advocate can have ability, standing at the Bar, special knowledge or experience in law for designating as Senior Advocate. The qualities of ability, standing at the Bar, and special knowledge and experience in law are present in the Advocates practicing in Trial and District Courts as much as of the Advocates practicing in the High Courts and the Supreme Court”, the Court added.
Case no. – Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4299/2024
Case Title – Jitender @ Kalla v. State (Govt.) of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 555