The Supreme Court directed that only lawyers who are present in court physically or online during hearings are allowed to mark their appearance for cases (in the record of court proceedings, orders or judgments). Apex Court pointed out that advocates may be entitled to get certain benefits such as allotment of chamber, and senior designations based on their appearances in cases.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court issued a directive that only lawyers who are physically present in the courtroom or who participate online during hearings will be allowed to mark their appearance in the official court records, including proceedings, orders, and judgments.
A Bench consisting of Justices JK Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal emphasized that the privilege of marking one’s appearance in court carries significant benefits. These benefits may include the allotment of chambers and consideration for senior designations, which are based on a lawyer’s active participation in cases.
Therefore, it is considered fundamentally unfair for lawyers who were not present—whether in person or virtually—to mark their appearance in any case.
“In the long run, if the advocates, who are not present in the Court are permitted to mark their presence, it may have an adverse impact on those Bar members who are appearing regularly,”
-the Court observed.
The Bench further stressed,
“For sanctity of the proceedings and for betterment of the Institution, online information (online submission of the names of lawyers appearing in a matter) ought to be submitted of only those advocates who are either appearing or assisting during hearing, personally or online.”
This directive was issued during the hearing of a batch of part-heard contempt petitions on August 29. The case in question brought to light an instance where a lawyer, who was not in town during the hearing, was still listed among those who had appeared for the proceedings.
This incident occurred despite the introduction of the Advocate Appearance Portal, an online platform launched in December 2022. Through this portal, Advocates-On-Record (AoRs) are required to submit the names of the lawyers appearing in a matter every morning. However, it was revealed during the hearing that the lawyer in question was neither physically present in the courtroom nor attending via video conference.
The Bench also highlighted that there were additional instances where lawyers who were not present in court had their names submitted for marking their appearance. The Court expressed concern that the Advocate Appearance Portal was being misused, as it was intended solely to record the presence of lawyers who are genuinely in court to argue or assist in a case.
“It would not mean that the advocate, who is neither present personally nor online, may be allowed to mark his presence by furnishing online information,”
-the Court underscored.
Moreover, the Court clarified that even lawyers who are associated with the office of the arguing counsel but are not present in the courtroom, either physically or via video conference, should not have their appearance marked.
“We forthwith direct that in this Court, online presence of only those advocates be furnished and be marked who are appearing or assisting during hearing … and not of those who are not present in Court but may be associated in office of the advocates,”
-the Court ordered.
The Supreme Court also called upon the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) to ensure compliance with this directive.
“We also request the Presidents of respective Bar Associations of the Supreme Court to look into the issue and notify the members for taking corrective steps,”
-the Court added.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Lawyers
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
