Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 23rd February, 2023
HARDIK KAPOOR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ujwal Ghai, Mr. Shivek Rai Kapoor, Mr. Sanchit Saini, Mr. Arpit Sharma & Mr. Bhanu Malhotra, Advocates. (M:8860151818)
Through: Mr Sunil K. Kalra, Advocate for R-3.
(M:9810396959)
Mr. Ajay Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate for BCD.
Mr. Preet Pal Singh, Mr. Saurabh Sharma & Mr. Shivam Sachdeva, Advocates (M-9958555055)
JUDGMENT
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. In the last two decades or so, the legal profession has undergone a drastic change. Court complexes are now no longer visited by lawyers and litigants alone but also a large segment of students who work as interns and researchers who assist lawyers and judges. The present petition has been filed by one law student who is stated to be working as an intern - Hardik Kapoor who is a second year law student pursuing LLB challenging the impugned notice/circular dated 24th November, 2022 issued by Hon’ble Secretary Shahdara Bar Association, Karkardooma Court Complex, Delhi.
3. As per the said impugned notice/circular, the Shahdara Bar Association resolved that interns ought to wear white shirt, blue coat and trousers to enter the Karkardooma Court Complex. The impugned notice/ circular reads as under: “All the members of SBA Regd. are hereby informed that the interns are appearing in the courts wearing black coats and many times it is difficult to differentiate between the advocates and interns. It is unanimously decided by the executive committee that there shall be a dress code for the interns i.e. white shirt and blue coat and trousers. Hence all the members of the bar are requested to instruct their interns to wear white short and blue coat and trousers w.e.f. 01.12.2022. Thereafter, if interns will be found wearing black coat and trousers, then they will not be allowed to appear in the courts. The members are requested to co-operate”
4. The above circular issued by the Shahdara Bar Association is under challenge in the present writ petition. Various grounds were raised challenging the said circular when the matter was heard on 1st December,
2022. Reliance was placed upon Rule 27 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 and an Order passed by a ld. Single Judge in W.P.(C) 9542/2018 titled ‘Kunwar Gangesh Singh & Ors. v. Bar Council of India & Ors.’. After hearing counsels for the parties, this Court directed as under: “7. This Court is of the opinion that considering the large number of interns who visit the premises of the District Courts in Delhi and the Delhi High Court, a uniform policy on the dress code for interns, ought to be arrived at by consensus of all the concerned stakeholders. As of today only the Shahdara Bar Association has issued a circular changing the dress code. This would in effect mean that an intern attending proceedings in multiple courts including trial courts and High Court would have to wear different coloured coats in the various fora. A consistent uniform should be prescribed for interns all across Delhi, inasmuch as if different bar associations start prescribing different uniforms, interns would be inconvenienced.
8. Accordingly, let a meeting of all the Bar Associations and other stake holders be called by Mr. Murari Tiwari, Chairman Bar Council of Delhi to evolve a consensus as to what should be the uniform that interns should wear for entering the various Court premises. The question as to whether there is a need to change the dress code for interns shall also be considered. Consensus shall be arrived at bearing in mind Rule 27 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008.
9. The meeting to be called by the Chairman Bar Council of Delhi be held on 12th December, 2022 at 4:00 p.m. at a venue which may be notified by him. The Bar Council of India’s representative would also be invited for the said meeting.
10. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned notice/circular shall remain stayed.”
5. In addition to the Bar Council of India, notice was also issued to Shahdara Bar Association and the Bar Council of Delhi (hereinafter ‘BCD’).
6. The BCI, BCD as also the Shahdara Bar Association have appeared today. On behalf of the Shahdara Bar Association-Mr. Sunil K. Kalra, ld. Counsel has vehemently submitted that there is a conflict between the uniform prescribed for advocates under the Rules prescribed by the Bar Council of India ( hereinafter ‘BCI’) and Rule 27 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008. He submits that a large number of Judicial Officers and lawyers appearing before District Courts and Civil Courts wear black ties instead of bands. He places the BCD’s resolution vide letter dated 23rd December 2022, referencing the meeting of the BCD dated 16th December, 2022, wherein the dress code has been prescribed for law interns as white shirt with black tie, black pant and black coat. It is his stand that there has to be a distinguishing feature between Judicial Officers/Advocates on the one hand and interns on the other hand. On behalf of the BCD, the resolution of the BCD passed on 16th December, 2022 is relied upon to argue that the distinguishing feature would be the black tie which interns can wear. Mr. Pritpal Singh on behalf of the BCI submits that the uniform is already prescribed by the BCI in terms of the Rules.
7. On behalf of ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, it is submitted that the Shahdara Bar Association circular directing blue blazer in any case is not sustainable.
8. Under the Advocates Act, 1961, Section 49 vests powers in the BCI to make rules over a variety of subject matters. One such power which is vested with the BCI is under Section 49(1)(gg) which reads as under: “the form of dresses or robes to be worn by advocates, having regard to the climatic conditions, appearing before any court or tribunal”
9. Pursuant to this power which is vested in the BCI, the BCI has published rules under Section 49(1)(gg) which reads as ‘Form of dresses or Robes to be worn by Advocates’ in Chapter IV. The said prescription of the BCI would be extremely relevant and is extracted below: “BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA RULES FORM OF DRESSES OR ROBES TO BE WORN BY ADVOCATES* (Rules under Section 49 (I) (gg) of the Act) Advocates appearing in the Supreme Court, High Courts, Subordinate Courts, Tribunals or Authorities shall wear the following as part of their dress, which shall be sober and dignified.*
1. ADVOCATES (a) A black buttoned up coat, chapkan, achkan, black sherwani and white bands with Advocates' Gowns. (b) A black open breast coat. white shirt, white collar, stiff or soft, and white bands with Advocates' Gowns. In either case wear long trousers (white, black striped or grey) Dhoti excluding jeans. Provided further that in courts other than the Supreme Court, High Courts, District Courts, Sessions Courts or City Civil Courts, a black tie may be worn instead of bands.
LADY ADVOCATES
(a) Black full sleeve jacket or blouse, white collar stiff or soft, with white bands and Advocates' Gowns. White blouse, with or without collar, with white bands and with a black open breast coat. Or (b) Sarees or long skirts (white or black or any mellow or subdued colour without any print or design) or flare (white, black or black stripped or grey) or Punjabi dress Churidar Kurta or Salwar-Kurta with or without dupatta (white or black) or traditional dress with black coat and bands.
III. Wearing of Advocates' gown shall be optional except when appearing in the Supreme Court or in High Courts.
IV. Except in Supreme Court and High Courts during summer wearing of black coat is not mandatory. An amendment was thereafter recommended in the above Uniform stipulations, by the Rules Committee at its meeting dt. 24.08.2001 was approved by the Bar Council of India at its meeting held on 25th and 26th August, 2001 (Resolution No. 121/2001). The Chief Justice of India approved the Rules vide letter dt. 12.11.2001 subject to modification of Rule IV. The amendment suggested by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India was incorporated in Rule IV vide Resolution No. 155/2001 dt. 22nd and 25th December, 2001. “In the change brought about in the Dress Rules, there appears to be some confusion in so far as the Sub Courts are concerned. For removal of any doubt it is clarified that so far as the courts other than Supreme Court and High Court are concerned during summer while wearing black coat is not mandatory, the advocates may appear in white shirt with black, white striped or gray pant with black tie or band and collar.”
10. A perusal of the above would show that, initially, the dress which was prescribed by the BCI in proviso to Clause 1, stipulated that in forums other than the Supreme Court, High Courts, District Courts, Sessions Court or City Civil Courts a black tie may be worn instead of bands. The said clause as originally prescribed would in effect mean that in all courts from the City Civil Courts and above, advocates would be required to wear bands. The above was amended owing to the modification approved by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, in its meeting of the BCI dated 24th August, 2001. The said amendment which was incorporated as a modification of Rule IV and reads as under: “In the change brought about in the Dress Rules, there appears to be some confusion in so far as the Sub Courts are concerned. For removal of any doubt it is clarified that so far as the courts other than Supreme Court and High Court are concerned during summer while wearing black coat is not mandatory, the advocates may appear in white shirt with black, white striped or gray pant with black tie or band and collar”
11. A perusal of the above amendment which was meant to modify Rule IV would show that advocates appearing outside the Supreme Court and the High Court may wear a black tie or band and collar in summers without black coats. The focus in the said modification is on the wearing or non-wearing of black coats due to the heat in the summers and not on wearing of ties or bands. However, the modification in Rule IV read with Rule I may have, resulted in confusion leading to wearing of black ties by advocates outside the Supreme Court and the High Court. This is the reason, as per the counsel appearing for the Shahdara Bar Association, for which, the said Bar Association feels that their ought to be a distinction between interns and advocates.
12. The interpretation of Rule I is clear to the effect that all advocates would have to wear bands right from the City Civil Courts till the Supreme Court. Rule IV is merely a relaxation for wearing of the black coat and does not mean that black ties can be worn in courts. This would in effect mean that all advocates would have to, in general, wear white bands while appearing before courts of any hierarchy. The recent resolution of the BCD, therefore, where the BCD has prescribed the uniform as black tie for interns would not come in conflict with the uniform prescribed for advocates which is the white band. The said Resolution of the BCD dated 16th December 2022, as captured in the communication dated 23rd December 2022 addressed by the BCD to the Shahdara Bar Association reads:
13. Going forward, therefore, it is clarified that the uniform for advocates appearing before any courts right from the City Civil Courts, Sessions Court, District courts, High Courts and Supreme Court would be white bands and not black ties, along with their other uniform as prescribed. Interns can enter court complexes with white shirt and black ties along with black pants and black coats. This would in fact be in consonance with Rule 27 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 which read as under: “27. Formal Dress Code during internship: Students placed under internship or in moot court exercise shall have formal dress of legal professional in pupilage as follows: (For all) White/Black trouser, white shirt, black tie, black coat, black shoe and black socks. When students have problems of getting the entire formal dress for any reason, they have to have a white trouser, full sleeve shirt to be tucked in and covered shoe. (Optional for Girl students) Black printed sharee, with white full sleeve blouse and covered black shoe or Lawyer's Suit with black covered shoe. The Organization or Advocate under whom the internee is placed is required -to follow suitable dress code.”
14. In this view of the matter the impugned circular of the Shahdara Bar Association would not survive and shall be superseded by the uniform prescribed by the BCD which would be followed uniformly across Delhi.
15. With these observations, the present petition, along with all pending applications, is disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J FEBRUARY 23, 2023 dj/rp