Today, On 19th March, The Supreme Court ruled that only the arguing counsel, the advocate-on-record (AoR), and one assisting counsel can have their names officially recorded. Additionally, the Court emphasized that a Senior Counsel cannot appear without an advocate-on-record. This decision aims to maintain procedural discipline in court proceedings. The ruling clarifies the hierarchy and roles of legal representatives before the apex court.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that only lawyers who are physically present in court and actively arguing a case will have their names recorded in court orders.
This decision may cause concern among the legal community.
According to the decision by Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, in addition to the arguing counsel, one counsel assisting them and the advocate-on-record can also have their appearance noted.
Also Read: “Conduct Constitution Day Function on 26th November 2024”: SCBA Urges CJI Sanjiv Khanna
The Bench stated,
“The respective court masters shall ensure that only the Senior Advocate, advocate-on-record, or any advocate who is physically present and arguing the matter at the time of the hearing, along with one advocate assisting them, have their appearances recorded,”
The Court further stipulated that a Senior Counsel cannot appear without an advocate-on-record in the Supreme Court.
The judgment specifies that recorded appearances will be limited to:
- Senior Advocate
- Advocate-on-record
- Any lawyer actively arguing the case
- An advocate assisting the arguing counsel
If there are any changes to this arrangement, the court master must be notified.
Currently, the advocate-on-record (AoR) provides the names of all lawyers involved in a case to the court master, and these names are included in the court’s records. There is no limit on the number of names, allowing lawyers who assist with drafting, research, and case preparation without necessarily arguing the case to be included.
Also Read: SCBA Writes to CJI: Proposing Statues Honoring First President and CJI in Court Premises
This judgment restricts the number of assisting counsel to one and challenges a long-standing practice within the Supreme Court.
The Court stated today that while any advocate listed on the roll of a Bar Council is entitled to appear before the Supreme Court, their appearance is subject to the rules established by the Supreme Court.
These rules must be followed by both officers and lawyers, the Court emphasized,
“The Supreme Court, as the highest court in the country, requires that the practices and procedures followed in its proceedings by advocates and court officers comply strictly with the statutory rules it has established, rather than operating outside of them.”
In September 2024, the Court directed the CBI to investigate a case in which a litigant denied filing a special leave petition (SLP) and claimed he had never engaged any lawyers for representation.
This matter prompted the Bench to issue stringent instructions to advocates-on-record (AoRs) to ensure that only those lawyers authorized to appear and argue a case on that specific day are marked as present.
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) subsequently filed a plea requesting a modification of that order. Both the SCBA and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) were jointly heard on the matter.
Today, the Bench remarked on an unusual practice of marking the presence of numerous lawyers without verifying their actual attendance or authorization to appear.
Justice Trivedi stated while delivering the verdict,
“In fact, there was no verification to confirm whether they were present at all or authorized to appear. We have stated that while an advocate is entitled to appear before the Supreme Court, such appearance will be subject to the rules established in 2013 by the Supreme Court,”
Case Title: Supreme Court Bar Association v. State of Uttar Pradesh [MA 3-4/2025 in Crl.A. No. 3883-3884/2024; Diary No. 48169/2024]