LATEST NEWS

History

These two sections certainly constituted a wide enlargement of the rights of the advocates, vakils and attorneys of the High Court in that they enabled those legal practitioners to exercise their profession in all subordinate courts in India.

In the Calcutta High Court, the advocates, i.e., the Barristers of England and Ireland and the Advocates of Scotland were also entitled to appear and plead on the Original Side on the instructions of an attorney. These advocates were also entitled to appear and plead on the Appellate Side of the High Court and in the subordinate courts and revenue offices. But the vakils of the Calcutta High Court were not entitled to act or plead on the Original Side or in appeals from the Original Side. The distinction was maintained in the Calcutta High Court right up to 1932.

The Madras High Court, however, as early as in 1886, altered its rules and under new Rules Nos. 4 and 5 permitted the vakils admitted under the rules of 1863 and the attorneys to appear, plead and act for suitors on the Original Side. These rules were challenged by the attorneys but were held to be valid. The Insolvency Rules Nos. 128 and 129, however, permitted an advocate to appear and plead in court or in chambers and an attorney to appear, plead and act in all proceedings. Under these rules, the barristers and vakils could not act in the Insolvency Court. The result, therefore, was that in the Madras High Court, there remained no distinction between barristers, vakils and attorneys as regards their right to appear and plead on the Original Side. Under the new rules, the vakils and attorneys could also act on the Original Side while the advocates had to be instructed by an attorney. In the Insolvency Court, however, advocates and vakils could appear and plead but the attorneys alone couldact.

In the Bombay High Court, the Original Side was initially a close preserve for the barristers as in the Calcutta High Court. There also the barristers were originally the only persons who could be enrolled as advocates entitled to appear and plead on the Original Side on the instructions of an attorney. The vakils were not originally permitted to act or plead on the Original Side. This position, however, was soon relaxed and, as already mentioned, a non-barrister, on passing an examination conducted by the High Court became eligible for enrolment as advocate entitled to appear and plead on the Original Side. Some of the very eminent Original Side advocates of Bombay became enrolled as such on passing this examination. The only limitation was that the advocates of the Original Side, barristers or non-barristers, had to be instructed by an attorney before they could appear and plead on the Original Side.

In the other High Courts there was no Original Side and consequently there was no substantial distinction between the advocates who were mainly barristers and the vakils of the High Court as regards their respective rights to appear, act and plead in those High Courts.

The Indian Bar Council Act, 1926 was enacted in response to a demand by the legal profession for unification and autonomy of the Bar and it achieved a certain measure of relief eliminating the two grades of practitioners, Vakils and pleaders, by merging them in the class of advocates who are entitled as of right to practise in the High Courts in which they were enrolled and in any other Courts in British India subject to creation exceptions. The Act also provided for the Constitution of Bar Council for the High Courts with power of admission of advocates, to prescribe their qualifications and to enquire into any case of misconduct. In this context, the establishment of the Supreme Court of India, exercising appellate jurisdiction over the High Courts naturally stimulated the demand for the unification of the Bar in India, and Parliament passed the Advocates Act, 1961, as a step towards the end.

An all India Bar Committee was appointed which made its recommendations in 1953 after taking into account the recommendations of the Law Commission. In the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill which came to be enacted as Act, the main features were stated as follows: