Report No. 72

2. Debates in the Constituent Assembly.-

The question as to whether a person who has held office as a Judge of the High Court should, after ceasing to hold that office, be entitled to practise in any court was the subject of considerable controversy at the time the Constitution was drafted. Draft Article 196 (which ultimately took the shape of Article 220), as drafted by the Drafting Committee, was as follows1:-

"196. No person who has held office-

(a) as a judge of a High Court, or

(b) as an additional judge or temporary judge of a High Court on having been recruited from the Bar, shall plead or act in any Court or before any authority within the territory of India."

After discussion, the draft Article 196 was amended according to the amendment moved by Dr. Ambedkar. The article as adopted was as follows2:-

"196. Prohibition of practising in courts or before any authority by a person who held office as a Judge of a High Court.- No person who has held office as a judge of a High Court after the commencement of this Constitution shall plead or act in any Court or before any authority within the territory of India."

The Constituent Assembly rejected an amendment moved by Mr. Hukam Singh3, according to which the ban on practice would have operated only within the jurisdiction of that High Court in which the person concerned has held the office of Judge.

1. Shiva Rao The Framing of India's Constitution, (1967), Vol. 3, p. 591, Draft Article 196 (Draft Constitution prepared by the Drafting Committee, 21st February, 1948).

2. C.A. Debates, Vol. 8, p. 685 (7th June, 1949).

3. C.A. Debates, Vol. 8, p. 680 (7th June, 1949).