INTRODUCTION
Recent proceedings of the Supreme Court of India have revealed an overwhelming change in marking the appearances of counsel in hearings. A wake-up call on this issue came in the form of a request by an advocate for her name to be inserted into the court files even though she did not personally appear in the case. Lastly, it was the bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma that did not merely restrain such a practice but also reminded everyone that AoRs are very vital for attending the cases.
BACKGROUND
There was one case in which this matter came up in a hearing. An advocate had hired a senior attorney to appear on her behalf and asked that in the order of the court she should be included. She argued that even though she was not appearing before the court, it is normal procedure that a list of names is compiled since, if their names were omitted from the records, clients would either assume that they never participated or that the attorney’s skills lacked professionalism. Justice Bela M. Trivedi turned down this request, making it known that such acts would not take place any more.
This falls within the larger trend whereby the Supreme Court has been pursuing tapes of appearances. Earlier, a bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal ruled that the presence of attorneys could be recorded only in official records if they were either physically or virtually present in court. The rationale behind this directive was to ensure integrity and justice in the courts.
KEY POINTS-
Justice Trivedi explained that they will no longer mark appearances for advocates who do not appear in court. She emphasized that if AoRs want their names to be recorded, they must ensure they are there.
Refering to the judgement: While reiterating that AoRs can record appearances only for those advocates permitted to argue on a particular day, the bench noted that this was clarified in a related ruling referred to it wherein it termed as “sham” an SLP. This is also in line with the earlier circular which explained the marking appearances process and was issued on December 30, 2022.
Implications on Advocate: The ruling tries to protect the integrity of the court process and prevent the apparent unfair benefit that may arise from allowing the presence of advocates that do not attend cases in court.
Advocate-On-Record (AoR) Role
An advocate on record is someone who represent the client and file case in supreme court. The Supreme Court has identified clear criteria of the duties that AoRs have to perform.
Authorized Appearance: AoRs should lodges names of advocates authorized to appear and argue on particular dates.
Notice of Changes: All changes in representation must be noted to the court master before or at the time of hearing.
Adherence to the Directives: The judiciary asked numerous bar associations to comply with these newly instituted practices. The judges have been emphasizing that those who are recording should only record cases in which they are actively participating in the proceeding.
Conclusion
This is evident in the latest rulings of the Supreme Court, which demonstrate adherence to the integrity of procedure within legal practice. The clarification by the court on a “role and responsibility” of an advocate-on-record is for the purposes of ensuring official recognition only of those persons who are actively involved in a hearing in the records. This step will enhance transparency and accountability within the law practice; all practitioners will strictly be placed under their obligations while there are sessions in court. These new practices would largely alter the perception and delivery of legal representation in India’s Supreme Court.
