The Draft Advocate Bill seeking to control the lawyers in the country, was made available for public consultation on February 13 on ministry’s website and withdrawn on February 22, about a week before the public consultation was scheduled to close on February 28.

The consultations were first completed by the Union Ministry for Law in 2017, and the proposed amendments have been pending since. On the basis of the consultation, the Union Government has claimed, the Draft Advocates (Amendment) Bill 2025 was prepared and put on the ministry’s website for public consultation.

However, the kind of controversy the draft generated, including the alleged intention of the Union Government led by PM Narendra Modi to control the lawyers of the country, speaks a lot about the very poor quality of consultation process and production of the draft bill even after 7 years of the first consultation process were completed. Why at all this government wants to control lawyers? It is a million dollar question.

Various lawyers’ bodies of the country have threatened protest against the bill since it proposed to take disciplinary action against any lawyer for disrupting court functioning and even cancelling their license to practice. One of the proposals allowed the Union Government to appoint three nominees of its own in bar councils to conduct disciplinary actions against lawyers for their any alleged misconduct, which may not according to the “standards of professional conduct and etiquette and to prescribe regulations as it may deem necessary” that was to be laid down by the proposed legislation. The proposed legislation also allowed foreign law firms to practice in India purportedly to bring professionalism in Indian courtrooms.

The draft bill was criticized by advocates in general. Even the advocates having affiliations or connections with BJP have also criticized it. The Bar Council of India (BCI) chairperson and BJP MP Manan Kumar Mishra has also in a letter to the Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal has said that the draft bill endangered the autonomy of the BCI.

After the stiff resistance by lawyers’ bodies the Union Ministry of Law while withdrawing the law for a fresh appraisal and bringing out a revised draft bill said, “Considering number of suggestions and concerns received, it has been decided to conclude the consultation process now. Based on the feedback received, the draft bill, as revised, will be processed afresh for consultation with stakeholders.”

In earlier consultations with bar associations across the country, including the Supreme Court Bar Association, the representatives of the bars had opposed the Law Commission’s 266th report that had recommended stringent disciplinary action against lawyers disrupting court work. They had also opposed the proposals for barring them from practising under the draft bill.

One of the points of contention was strike actions by lawyers, which may amount to disruption of the court work. Law Commission had recommended only a day’s token strike by lawyers to be allowed in only compelling circumstances, that too with the prior approval of the concerned bar council. The draft bill that seeks to amend Advocates Act, 1961, introduced a new section prohibiting boycotts or abstention from court’s work.

The proposed legislation read, “No association of advocates or any member of the association or any advocate, either individually or collectively, shall give a call for boycott or abstinence from courts’ work or boycott or abstain from courts’ work or cause obstruction in any form in court’s functioning or in court premises.”

Additionally, the Law Commission had recommended for appointments of eminent persons outside of the legal profession in the proposed statutory body to deal with disciplinary proceeding against lawyers. This proposed legislation in the draft bill has been objected by lawyers’ associations on the ground that it was “introduction of non-legal persons into the statutory body in the name of eminent persons” and the provision may be misused to establish government control over the advocates.

Bar associations in several parts of the country have been protesting the draft bill, abstaining from work, and even resorting to strike actions against the proposed legislation, and have threatened to stiffen protest if such a law is brought in future to put lawyers under direct or indirect government control. In the meantime, the BCI has appealed to the lawyers and bar bodies to refrain from further protests and strikes, and to call off their protests and resume their work. BCI had also warned the government that nationwide protests may escalate if advocates concerns are not addressed. (IPA Service)