Introduction

From the onset of civilization, administration of justice has remained most important function of
the State so that the efficacy of any government is tested by its ability to effectively impart
justice to its people.

The Legal Profession is an important limb of the machinery for the administration of justice.
Without a well-organized profession of law, the courts would not be in a position to administer
justice effectively as the evidence in favor or against the parties to a suit cannot be properly
marshaled, facts cannot be properly articulated and the best legal arguments in support or against
the case of the parties cannot be put forth before the court. Without this limb, there cannot exist a
fruitful relationship between the common man and the Courts.

It was rightly pointed out in Law Commission, XIV Report, 556 (1958) “A well-organized
system of judicial administration postulates a properly equipped and efficient Bar.

Legal profession in ancient India

In India during the earlier period, people live in small groups. The heads of these groups or
tribes delivered justice under open sky before all the members. Open arguments were made.
There were no specialist like a lawyer during those days. When Kingships was established in the
society, Kings delivered justice. In King's Court, the king was advised by his councilors. The
law of those days was a rooted in Hindu religion and custom. Dharma was protected by the
king. Though there was no Institution of a lawyer, some intellectual people served justice
(Councillors and religious heads). During those days, the sufferer presented complaint before
the king in his court and thereafter the court summoned the defendant to submit his reply. The
Court then investigated the matter on the evidence. The King took the advice of the religious
heads and wise courtier and then delivered the judgment. The same procedure was followed
in all cases.

Legal Profession in Medieval India

The establishment of the Muslim rule in India opened a new chapter in the judicial history. The
Muslim conquerors brought with them a new religion, a new civilization and a new social
system which could not have a professional effect on the judicial system. The Muslim kings
regarded administration of justice as a religious duty. During the Muslim period, there was
no Institution of the legal profession. But both the parties of the litigation appoints their
Vakils. This body decides the case and they were paid a percentage of the amount in the suit.
The Court has the power to decide who should be allowed to appear as Vakils. They act as
agent for principals but not as lawyers.

Legal Profession in British Era

The form and organization in which the institution of legal profession exists today has no
relevance or connection with the period of Indian history prior to the advent of British Rule in
India.

Legal Profession in Presidency Towns

The history of the legal profession in India can be traced back to the establishment of the First
British Court in Bombay in 1672 by Governor Aungier. The admission of attorneys was placed
in the hands of the Governor-in-Council and not with the Court. Prior to the establishment
of the Mayor’s Courts in 1726 in Madras and Calcutta, there were no legal practitioners.

1. Charter of 1726 (Mayor’s Court)

In the Charter of 1726, which established the Mayor’s Courts at the three Presidency Towns,
no specific provision was made laying down any particular qualifications for the persons
who would be entitled to act or plead as legal practitioners in these courts. Presumably, it was
left to these courts to regulate this matter by rules of practice which these courts were
authorized to frame. Many persons who have no knowledge of law were used to practice
before the said Courts because no provision was made for proper training.

2. Charter of 1753

In 1753, another charter was issued to modify the charter of 1726. This charger also
ignored significant provision for legal training and education relating to legal practitioner.
 3. Charter of 1774

The Regulating Act, 1773 empowered the British Crown to establish a Supreme Court at
Calcutta by issuing a Charter. Accordingly, a supreme court at Calcutta was established by is
sung the charter of 1774. 

Clause II of the Charter of 1774 empowered the said Supreme Court of Judicature Calcutta to
approve and enroll advocates and Attorneys- in-law. They were to be Attorneys of record. 
They were authorized to appear and act in the supreme court.

The supreme court had the power to remove any advocate for Attorney on reasonable cause.
Indian legal practitioners were not allowed to enter the supreme court. At that time
'Advocate' means the British and Irish Barristers and member of the faculty of advocates
in Scotland. The term  'Attorney' applied to the British attorneys or solicitor . No other
person whatever, but Advocates or Attorneys so admitted and enrolled, were to be allowed to
appear and plead, or act in the Court for or on behalf of such suitors.

Legal Profession in Company’s Courts

1. Bengal Regulation VII of 1793

In the Company’s adalats, the deplorable state of affairs concerning the legal profession has been
graphically narrated in the preamble to Bengal Regulation VII of 1793. The Vakils were and
largely ignorant of the law and were subject to harassment and extortion from the
ministerial officers of the courts.

The regulation thus laid emphasis on the useful role which a sound legal profession can play in
the administration of justice. The Regulations were enacted with a view to strengthening the
legal profession in the best interests of the litigant public, the members of the bar serving
trustees of their clients and thus helping in the sound administration of justice.

The Regulation brought a scale of professional fee based on a percentage of the value of the
property. He could not demand or accept any fee, goods, effects or valuable consideration from
his clients over and above the sanctioned fees. The ultimate punishment for such a violation was
dismissal of the lawyer. Thus, the theory of freedom of contact between the Vakil and his client
was not recognized. The fees of the pleaders were payable only after decision, and not before,
the Court being practically the paymaster.

An interesting provision made was that after a party retained a pleader, he was to execute
a vakalatnama constituting him pleader in the clause and authorizing him to prosecute or defend
the matter.

An extraordinary feature of this Regulation was that only Hindus and Muslims could be
enrolled as pleaders. The Sadar Diwani Adalat could appoint other proper persons of good
character and liberal education if sufficient number of persons qualified from the said college
were not available.  Vakeels attached to one court were not permitted to plead in any other court
without the sanction of the Sadar Diwani Adalat.

Every pleader was required to attend the court to which he was attached punctually and
regularly. If he was unable to attend the court due to any reason he had to notify it in writing to
the Registrar of the court. Failure to do so made him liable to a fine.

The courts exercised several disciplinary powers over the Vakils. A pleader showing disrespect
to the court in open court could be fined up to one hundred rupees by the court.

2. Bengal Regulation XXVI of 1814

This was passed for the purpose of reducing into one Regulation with amendments and
modifications the several rules which were in force regarding the office of Vakil or Native
Pleader in the Courts of Civil Judicature.

The power for licensing, disciplining and removal of Vakils which was hitherto vested in the
Sadar Adalat was now conferred by the Regulation in the Provincial court also. Whenever the
appointment of a Vakeel was required in any court, the judge was to nominate some suitable
person for the approval of the Provincial Court. The only person of Hindu or Muhammadan
persuasion were eligible for appointment as pleaders.

Preference for enrolment as Vakils was to be given to candidates educated in any of the 
Muhammadan or Hindu Colleges established or supported by the Government provided that such
candidates were in other respects duly qualified for the position.
Not to plead in other courts than to which attached.

The power of dismissing Vakeels has vested in the Sadar Diwani Adalat as well as the Provincial
Court. Professional work of the Vakeels came under the scrutiny of the courts.

3. Bengal Regulation 1831 & Bengal Regulation XII of 1833

Regulation V of 1831 prescribed that vakils need not Hindu or Muhammadan, but could be
persons belonging to any religion. Bengal Regulation XII of 1833 modified the provisions of
the earlier regulations regarding selection, appointment remuneration of the pleaders. The
regulation permitted any qualified person of whatever nationality or religion to be enrolled
as a pleader of Sadar Diwani Adalat.

The parties were also given freedom to settle with the pleaders any fees for their professional
services.

The Legal Practitioners Act, 1846

The Legal Practitioners Act 1846, which was the first All-India law concerning the pleaders in
the mofussil, made several important innovations.

The office of the pleaders in the courts of the Company was thrown open to all persons of
whatever nation or religion, provided he has duly certified (in such manner as directed by the
Sadar Courts) to be of good character and duly qualified for the other office. Thus, religious test
was abolished for enrolment as a Pleader.

Every barrister enrolled in any of Her Majesty’s Courts in India was made eligible to plead
in the Sadar Adalats.

Vakils were allowed freedom to enter into agreement with their clients for their fees for
professional services. This Act is regarded as “the first charter of the legal profession”
although it left unsolved the important question of the right of vakils to practice in the Supreme
Courts.
Legal Practitioners Act, 1853

The Legal Practitioners Act, 1853, declared every Attorney on the roll of any of Her Majesty’s
Supreme Courts  to be entitled to be plead in any of the Company’s Sadar Adalat. The
Barristers and Attorneys of the Supreme Courts were permitted to plead in the Company’s
Adalat (subordinate to the Sadar Adalats) as well. Thus, while Barristers and practitioners
were rigorously kept out of the three Supreme Courts. The reason was that the authorities held a
poor opinion of the native lawyers and it was thought that appearance of English Barristers in the
Company’s Adalats would improve the situation.

The Act also did away with the system of compulsory attendance of the pleaders in the court
to which they were attached. Henceforth no pleader was bound to attend in any court of company
on any day fixed for the transaction of civil business or to notify the court his inability to attend.

Legal Profession after High Courts

Indian High Courts Act, 1861

The Act was passed in the year 1861 with main object to abolish the Supreme Courts and
Sadar Adalats in the three presidency towns and to establish High Courts in their place.

At this time, there were in existence three bodies of practitioners in the Supreme Courts and, the
Sadar Adalats- Advocates, Attorneys and Vakils. Empowered the Court “to approve, admit
and enroll such and so many Advocates, Vakils and Attorneys as to the said High Court shall
deem fit.” These persons were “authorized to appear for the suitors of the High Court, and to
plead or to act, or to plead and act for the said suitors, according to as High Court may by its
rules and directions determine, and subject to such rules and directions.”

The admission of Vakeels to practice before these High Courts put an end to monopoly which
the Barristers had enjoyed in the Supreme Courts preceding the High Courts. This very much
increased the practice and prestige of the India Lawyers.
Pleaders, Mukhtars and Revenue Agents Act, 1865

For long there functioned non-licensed inferior grades of practitioners in the mofussil, known as
mukhtars, who practiced in criminal courts as well as acted as solicitors for the pleaders. There
also functioned revenue agents in revenue offices. All these were recognized and brought
under control of the courts for the first time through the pleaders, Mukhtar, and Revenue
Agents Act XX of 1865. The High Courts were authorized to make the rules for the
qualifications, admission and enrollment of proper persons to be Pleader, Mukhters, for the
fee to be paid for the examination, admission and enrolled. Revenue Agents who worked in the
revenue offices and courts were also given status as legal practitioners by this Act.

The Legal Practitioners Act, 1879

This Act was enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to legal practitioners.

The Act repealed the Pleaders, Mukhtars and Revenue Agents Act 1865.

At this time, there were six grades of practitioners functioning in India. Advocates, Solicitors
(Attorneys), and Vakils of the High Court: Pleaders, Mukhtars and revenue agents in the lower
courts. The High Court  laid down standards for admission of Vakils to practice in the High
Court; for Zila Courts, standards were laid down in the Regulations which were lower for
pleaders than the High Court vakils. Thus, Vakils became a distinct grade above the Pleader.

The Legal Practitioners Act, 1879, brought all the six grades of legal practitioners into one
system under the jurisdiction of the High Courts.

The Act empowered an Advocate or a Vakil on the roll of any High Court to practice in his
own High Court, in all the courts subordinate thereto, in any court in British India other than
a High Court on whose roll he was not entered or with the permission of the court in any High
Court on whose roll he was not entered.

The High Court was empowered to make rules regarding the qualification, admissions and
certification of proper person to be pleaders of the subordinate courts and of the revenue
officers and for suspension and dismissal of such pleaders and mukhtars.
The Legal Practitioner Act, 1884

The power to make rules regarding Advocates of the High Court was also conferred on the non-
chartered High Courts by the Legal Practitioners Act, 1884 (X of 1884). Such a High Court
could make rules, with the previous sanction of the Provincial Government, as to the
qualifications and admission of proper persons to be Advocates of the Court, and subject to
such rules could enroll so many Advocates asit thought fit.

The High Court could dismiss any advocate or suspend him from practice after giving him an
opportunity of defending himself, but such an order needed the confirmation of the Provincial
Government.

The Legal Practitioners (women) Act, 1923

To remove doubts about the eligibility of women to be enrolled and to practice as legal
practitioners, the Legal Practitioners (Eomen) Act, XXIII of 1923, was enacted to expressly
provide that no woman would by reason only of her sex disqualified from being admitted or
enrolled as a legal practitioner or from practicing as such. Since this enactment, women
began getting enrolled as legal practitioners and their number has been increasing ever since.

INDIAN BAR COMMITTEE, 1923

With the increasing disparity between vakils and barristers, there was demand to remove the
disparity. The mover of the resolution, Munshi Ishwar Saran, not only laid emphasis the
removal of distinction between Barristers and Vakils but also advocated the constitution of a
recognized body consisting exclusively of lawyers in India to provide for legal education, to
exercise disciplinary control over the Bar and to deal with all others matters relating to the
legal profession. This was deemed important because many High Courts exercised disciplinary
powers over lawyers on the theory that Vakils were officers of the court.

In response to the pressures thus generated the Government of India in 1923 appointed the
Indian Bar Committee, popularly known as the Chamier Committee, under the Chairman
of Sir Edward Chamier. It recommended
  that in all High Courts, a single grade of practitioners entitled to plead, to be called
advocates (not Barristers), should be enrolled, and that the grade of for admission to
plead on the Original Side of a High Court Vakils or Pleaders be abolished
 that Advocates of one High Court should be entitled to practice in another High
Court subject to the conditions to be imposed by the Bar Council of the latter court, or by
the court where there is no Bar Council.
 On the question of organizing the legal profession on an all-India basis, the Committee
came to the conclusion that it did not consider it practicable at the time to organize the
bar on an all-India basis or to continue an all-India bar Council. The Committee
suggested however that a Bar Council should be constituted for each High Court.

The Committee proposed that a Bar Council should have power to make rules subject to the
approval of the High Court concerned in respect of such matters as inter alia:

 the qualifications, admission, and certificates of proper persons to be advocates of the

THE INDIAN BAR COUNCILS ACT, 1926

To implement recommendation
The object of the Act was to provide for the constitution and incorporation of Bar Councils
for certain Courts in British India to confer powers and impose duties on such Bar Councils
and to consolidate and the law relating to legal practitioners entitled to practice in such courts.
The purpose of the act thus was to unify the various grades of legal practitioners and to
provide some measure of self government to the Bars attached to the various Courts.
There was to be a Bar Council for each High Court. A Bar Council was to consist of 15
members.

 ALL INDIA BAR COMMITTEE, 1951

The Indian Bar Councils Act had left the pleaders, Mukhters etc. practicing in the mofussil
courts entirely out of its scope and did not bring about a unified Indian Bar. Further, the
Councils constituted under the Act were merely advisory bodies and were neither
Autonomous nor had any substantial authority. The Indian Legal profession was not satisfied
with what had been achieved by the Act of 1926. The Indian Practitioners had three main aims in
view, namely:

1. The abolitions of all distinctions between various classes and grades of legal
practitioner,

2. The democratization of Bar Councils by bringing in representatives Mofussil

3. The taking away of the control exercised by the High Courts over the members of
the legal profession, and vesting the same in the Bar Council.

With the establishment of the Supreme Court of India in 1950, under the new consideration, a
new stimulus was given to the demand for a unified All India Bar.

Accordingly, in 1951 the Govt. of India constituted a Committee under the chairmanship of
Justice S. R. Das of the Supreme Court.

Recommendation

 The Committee reported in 1953 and recommended the creation of a unified national
bar. The Committee recommended that all grades of legal practitioners be abolished
and that one integrated an autonomous All India Bar be formed. There should be a
common roll of advocates who would be entitled to practice in all courts in the
 country. The Committee accordingly suggested compilation and maintenance of one
comprehensive common roll of advocates.
 The committee also recommended the creation and All India Bar Councils and State
Bar Councils. Under the Indian Bar Council Act’1926, the Bar councils were merely
advisory bodies in the power of admission, suspension and removal from the role of
advocates were entirely vested in the respective High Courts. Subject to some safeguards,
the committee suggested that in the interest of a Autonomous National Bar, the
power of enrollment, suspension and removal of advocates be vested in the Bar
Councils.

LAW COMMISSION REPORT: 1958

The law Commission made its famous Fourteenth report in 1953 in which, among other things, it
again recommended establishment of a unified All India Bar, preparation of a common
role of advocates with right to practice in all the courts

The Committee emphasized the principle of autonomy of the Bar on which the Bar
Committee of 1951 had laid stress. Therefore, the Bar Councils would to be entirely
Autonomous Body consisting wholly of the members of the profession.  The Bar Council would
elect their own chairmen.

Advocates Act, 1961

n 1961, parliament enacted the Advocates Act to amend in consolidated the law relating to the
legal practitioner, and to provide for the constitution for the State Bar Council and All India Bar
Council. The Advocates Act implements the recommendation of the Bar Committee in the Law
Commission with some modifications. It repeals the Indian Bar Council Act, 1926, the Legal
Practitioners Act, 1879, in other laws under subject. The act has undergone several amendments
since its enactment in 1961. The Act extends to the whole of India.

The Bar Council of India has been entrusted inter alia with the following important functions:

(1)   To lay down standards of professional conduct and etiquette for advocates.
(2)   To safeguard the rights, privileges and interest of advocates

(3)   To promote legal education

(4)   To lay down standards of legal educati0on in consultation with the universities imparting
such educations in the State Bar Councils.

(5)   To recognize universities which degrees in law shall qualify for enrollment as an advocate
and up to visit and inspect the universities for that purpose.

(6)   To exercise general supervision and control over state bar councils.

(7)   To promote and support law reform

(8)   To organize legal aid to the poor.

The Act creates a State Bar Council in each state.

The main powers and functions of the State Bar Council are:

(a)    To admit persons as advocates on its roll

(b)   To prepare and maintain such rolls.

(c)    To entertain and determine cases of misconduct against advocates on its roll

(d)   To safeguard the right, privileges and interest of advocates on its roll

(e)    To promote and support law reform

(f)    To organize legal aid to the poor