Report No. 266
Pre-enrolment Training of Advocates
13.1 Another problem that requires to be highlighted is that without undergoing any training or facing subordinate courts, fresh graduates start appearing before the superior courts. Counsel engaged by litigants do not appear in the court, rather send raw hands to deal with the matters. While dealing with such a situation, the Supreme Court in Sanjay Kumar v. State of Bihar46, deprecated such practice by observing that an "arji", "farji" half-baked lawyer under the label of "proxy counsel", without any acquaintance with or authorisation from the litigant use, abuse or misuse the process of the court under the false impression that he has a right to waste public time.
13.2 In an unprecedented step, the Supreme Court in In re: Rameshwar Prasad Goyal47, held that conduct of Shri Goyal, AOR, lending his signature for petty amount without appearing in court had been reprehensible and not worth pardoning, and he was censured. The court also put him on probation for a year.
13.3 In view of above, the Law Commission recommends a specific clause in section 7(1) of the Advocates Act to provide for the rule making power of the Bar Council of India for pre-enrolment training and apprenticeship before the induction of a person as an advocate.