The Supreme Court has reiterated that an advocate's right to appear in court is inseparably linked with their duty to be present during hearings. The bench, comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, ruled that Advocates-on-Record (AORs) should not merely lend their names but actively engage in court proceedings.

"A right of an Advocate to appear for a party and to practice in the courts is coupled with the duty to remain present in the court at the time of hearing, and to participate and conduct the proceedings diligently, sincerely, honestly, and to the best of his ability. Rights and duties are two sides of the same coin, and they are inherently connected with each other."

The Court made these remarks while addressing a miscellaneous application filed by the Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Association (SCAORA) and the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), seeking clarification on a previous ruling regarding the recording of lawyers' appearances.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Restricts Senior Advocates from Appearing Without an AOR

The Supreme Court observed that in several cases, AORs only lent their names without any real involvement in the proceedings. The Court emphasized that every Vakalatnama or Memorandum of Appearance filed by an AOR carries significant responsibility and accountability.

"It is noticed by us that in many cases the Advocate-on-Record would merely lend his/her name without any further participation in the proceedings of the case. The Advocate-on-Record would be seldom found present along with the Senior Advocate. The Appearance Slip in the prescribed Form No.30 would also not have been given, showing the correct appearances."

The Court highlighted Rule 7(a) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, which mandates that an AOR must file a memorandum of appearance along with a duly executed Vakalatnama. If not executed in the AOR’s presence, they must ensure its authenticity before filing it.

The ruling also clarifies that only those lawyers who are physically present and arguing the case will have their appearances recorded. The Supreme Court noted that, previously, numerous advocates' appearances were marked in proceedings without verifying whether they were actually present in court or authorized to appear for a party.

"No practice can override statutory rules, especially when framed under Article 145 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court’s practice and procedure must strictly adhere to statutory rules and not deviate from them."

Read Also:- Supreme Court Clarifies Rules for Recording Advocates' Appearances in Court Proceedings

The Court further directed:

• AORs must certify the execution of the Vakalatnama if signed in their presence.
• If received from a notary or another advocate, the AOR must verify its authenticity before filing it.
• Only those physically present and actively assisting in court will have their appearances recorded.
• Senior Advocates cannot appear in court without an AOR.
• If there are changes in legal representation, the AOR must update the court accordingly.

This ruling holds significant implications for the legal fraternity. The SCBA and SCAORA had expressed concerns that the ruling might affect advocates' voting rights, chamber allotments, and eligibility for designation as Senior Advocates. However, the Court dismissed these concerns, stating that all advocates must comply with statutory rules, including those governing elections and chamber allotments.

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that every advocate practicing before it must maintain professional integrity, ensuring that legal representation is not a mere formality but an active duty toward clients and the judiciary.

Case Details: SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION & ANR. v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. M.A. No. 3-4/2025 in Crl.A. No. 3883-3884/2024