The Supreme Court on Thursday observed that a digital database for lawyers in the country with a parallel link to verify their law degrees could be an “innovative” idea to weed out lawyers with fake degrees.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said, “In the age of technology this appears to be an innovative idea which can be done,” after the suggestion was put forth in a petition filed by the Bar Association of India (BAI).
Issuing notice to the Centre, Bar Council of India (BCI), University Grants Commission (UGC) and all state bar councils, the bench, also comprising justice V Mohana, said, “For any coordinated effort, all the law universities will have to be impleaded, compelling them to disclose all bonafide law graduates of the university.”
Advocate Prashant Kumar, who is the president of BAI, stated that the petition sought a timebound National Digital Registry for the Legal Profession of India (NDRLP) containing a Unique National Advocate Identifier, real-time enrolment status, verified qualifications, disciplinary record, and a QR-verifiable public profile accessible to any litigant on a mobile phone in seconds.
Kumar, assisted by advocate Viipin Nair, said that the idea is to integrate verifiable data about a lawyer on a common platform where the verified law degree can also be linked with the help of UGC. “We will submit a mechanism and submit a policy paper by next date and can even include the All India Council of Technical Educations as even IITs are providing law degrees,” he said.
“The technical model is India’s own Aadhaar system — demonstrably achievable at national scale. Governance of the NDRLP would remain broadly with the BCI, the ministry of law and justice would be the funding and policy partner,” stated the BAI petition filed by advocate Mukesh Kumar Singh.
Kumar referred to BCI chairman Manan Kumar Mishra’s recent shocking remarks that approximately 35–40% of lawyers practising before courts may be fake. He said that even the Supreme Court raised grave concerns about the genuineness of law degrees held by enrolled advocates and had directed recently that only genuine law degree holders should be permitted to contest state Bar Council elections.
In April 2023, the issue of verification of genuine lawyers arose in a matter Ajay Shankar Srivastava v. BCI, where a high-powered committee was constituted and directions were issued to this effect. But these directions have not resolved the structural problem.
The bench said, “Maybe, we may have to constitute a new committee. Had this committee been effective, this crisis would not have arisen.”
The petition also proposed framing of a social media and digital conduct code under Section 49 of the Advocates Act 1961 within six months. Kumar said, “It is one thing that a member of lay public provides content (on social media) not aligning with the reality of court process.It is entirely another thing when an advocate does so, lending such content a false sense of authenticity of a professional viewpoint while the content is entirely unprofessional in its frame and intent.”
The CJI remarked, “We will show you samples of what kind of nasty comments are made by some persons and they have nothing to do with law.” The court was of the view that genuine lawyers bear professional ethics. “It is those who are not, who are defaming the profession. They may not even be enrolled as advocates,” the bench said.
India has approximately 1.8 million enrolled advocates and section 30 of the Advocates Act allows a lawyer to practice throughout the country. BAI said. “There is no single, publicly verifiable, real-time national record of who among them is genuinely enrolled, holds verified qualifications, and is in good standing…The system of enrolment and maintenance of rolls is fragmented across the 23 State Bar Councils, operating without uniform standards,” it said.
