AIBE to be a pre-enrollment exam? Amendments for Post-enrollment exams and raising difficulty level hinted by SC; Read

A Supreme Court Bench of five-judges on Tuesday, September 27, said that it would be more fitting if the All India Bar Examination be held as a pre-enrollment examination. Moreover, they also hinted exams for post-enrollment of advocates. Read here in detail.

Challenges of law aspirants will increase as Supreme Court Bench of five judges - Justice SK Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice AS Oka, Justice Vikram Nath and Justice JK Maheshwari, supported Attorney General KK Venugopal's suggestion to conduct All India Bar Examination (AIBE), as a pre-enrollment examination. The senior counsel informed the court that., "The Act as it now stands permits rules to be framed for pre-enrolment exam. For post-enrolment exams, an amendment needs to be made, that vanishes with pre-enrolment exam."

LATEST: SC Verdict on AIBE: To be a Post-Enrollment exam, Questions raised on Employment; Read

Moreover, he also stated that the pre-enrollment (legal) training for law aspirants as introduced by the Bar Council of India (BCI) is subject to challenge, referring to V Sudeer v. Bar Council of India. 

The court stated, "These rules show that subject to the conditions laid down in these rules an enrolled advocate can practise as a full-fledged advocate. His right once granted cannot be restricted qua his acting in the Court when remaining enrolled as an advocate on the State roll. It must, therefore, be held that Section 49(1) (ah) cannot sustain the impugned rules."

Justice SK Kaul recommended that the difficulty level of AIBE should be determined on the basis of number of advocates required in the country. As stated, "How many lawyers do you need in the system? Ideally if work is reasonably done, how many lawyers are needed? Is it required to have such a lenient exam?” He further emphasized that the minimum standard required should be of adequate quality to determine the competence to practice.

Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan recommended the court to consider incentivising or motivate training among young lawyers before practice. Further, it could be one of the deciding factors for promotion of lawyers as seniors or to the bench. 

The SC Bench will continue hearing the matter on Wednesday, September 28, 2022. 

Highlights

The bench referred to the following questions for consideration: 

Q. 1 Whether Pre-enrolment training in terms of Bar Council of India Training Rules, 1995 framed under Section 24(3)(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961 could be validly prescribed by the Bar Council of India and if so whether the decision of this Court in V. Sudeer vs. Bar Council of India & Anr. [(1999) 3 SCC 176)] requires reconsideration?

Q. 2 Whether a pre-enrolment examination can be prescribed by the Bar Council of India under the Advocates Act, 1961?

Q. 3 Whether a post-enrolment examination can be validly prescribed by the Bar Council of India in terms of Section 49(1)(ah) of the Advocates Act, 1961, if in case questions Nos.1 and 2 are answered in the negative?

Moreover, Justice Kaul also suggested compiling the BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA VERSUS TWINKLE RAHUL MANGAONKAR & ORS. as a relevant order. 

AIBE XVII (17) 2022 exam date and application form related notification is yet to be published by the Bar Council of India, aggravating the plight of thousands of law graduates awaiting to qualify the exam. 

Read More:

• AIBE XVII Syllabus 2022 released, No update on exam schedule and applications; Check here
• AIBE XVII (17) 2022 to be held within 3 months: BCI Counsel Manan Kumar Mishra informs SC, Read
• Law Graduates not practising law for over 5 yrs need to re-appear for AIBE: BCI
•  BCI to allow other professionals to enroll as provisional advocates on qualifying AIBE? Read here latest update on AIBE