According to the Supreme Court on Tuesday, quality checks are necessary to restrict entry into the law profession because the quality of law education has declined in the country.
A petition was heard by the top court challenging a Gujarat High Court judgment in which it was provided that persons with other employment, either part-time or full-time, could become advocates without leaving their current jobs.
According to Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M.M. Sundresh, the entry level can have improvements, and the BCI is responsible for conducting proper exams.
The report stressed the importance of strict checks on law schools and the importance of stricter criteria at the entry-level.
The legal counsel, serving as amicus curiae here, suggested devising a system where people coming from employment are not enrolled and given certificates right from the outset, but rather put on a register qualified to take the exam and depending on the results, enrolled.
Upon passing the written examination and then a rigorous interview, the person may be eligible to enroll as a member of the Bar, added the counsel.
It was noted by the bench that it may not be appropriate for a person to continue working while enrolling. Furthermore, it was noted that when a legal professional leaves the profession, they do not surrender their enrolment certificate, and this needs to be regulated by BCI.
BCI was represented by senior advocate S.N. Bhat before the bench.
Besides, the supreme court insisted the BCI must test knowledge, pointing out that people are getting law degrees without ever attending classes, and citing instances where law courses have taken place in cowsheds. Furthermore, it stressed that there is a need for more serious criteria to enter the legal profession.
Person without attending classes gets a law degree is completely dilution of quality, the bench said.
The BCI counsel was instructed to control entry to ensure quality, as quality cannot be guaranteed through large numbers of entries. The bench set a further hearing for February 22 after a detailed hearing in the matter.