Chapter 4: The Advocates Act 1961

CHAPTER IV: RIGHT TO PRACTISE

This is a monumental section that established the Advocate as the single, legal practitioner class.

What it says in simple English: Subject to the rules of this Act, after the appointed day (when this Act took effect), there shall be only one class of people legally entitled to practice law: Advocates.
Practical Example: Before 1961, different courts had different types of legal professionals (like attorneys, vakils, or pleaders). This section eliminated those distinctions, consolidating the entire legal profession into the single, unified category of “Advocates,” creating the All-India Bar.

This section confers the fundamental, enforceable right to practice upon all enrolled advocates.

What it says in simple English: Every advocate whose name is officially listed on a State Roll has the right to practice throughout all territories where this Act is enforced. This right includes practicing in:
(i) All Courts: All courts, including the Supreme Court.
- Practical Example: An advocate enrolled in the State of Assam can, by right, appear and argue a case in the Bombay High Court or the Supreme Court in Delhi without requiring additional permission.
(ii) Tribunals or Persons authorized to take evidence: Any official tribunal (like the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) or any person who is legally allowed to receive formal evidence.
- Practical Example: The advocate can represent a client before the National Green Tribunal (a statutory tribunal) or a judicial inquiry commission authorized to take sworn testimony.
(iii) Any Other Authority or Person: Any other authority or person before whom the advocate is legally entitled to practice under any current law.
- Practical Example: The advocate has the right to appear before quasi-judicial bodies like the Registrar of Companies or the Patent Office, provided existing law permits it.

Note: This section was Omitted (repealed) by the Advocates (Amendment) Act, 1976.
What it says in simple English: This section is no longer part of the Act. It used to contain special rules related to attorneys (a specific type of legal practitioner under the old system). Its repeal solidified the “Advocate” as the sole class of legal professionals, making the older classifications obsolete.
Practical Example: You will not find this section in the current law books. Its removal is a historical point, confirming that the distinction between an attorney (who could only act on a client’s behalf) and an advocate (who could only plead) was eliminated nationwide.

This provides a vital exception to the rule that only advocates can practice.

What it says in simple English: Despite the rule that only enrolled advocates can practice (Section 29), any court, tribunal, or person (authority) has the power to allow any person who is not an enrolled advocate to appear before it or him/her in a specific, single case.
Practical Example: Mr. Sharma’s son is falsely accused of a minor offense. Mr. Sharma, a retired teacher, is not a lawyer. A Magistrate’s Court, convinced of Mr. Sharma’s expertise in the matter and his son’s need for guidance, grants him special permission to appear in court on his son’s behalf for that particular case only, even though he is not an advocate.

This reinforces the core principle of the monopoly of advocates in the legal profession.

What it says in simple English: Unless the Act itself or any other existing law specifically states otherwise, no person is legally entitled to practice in any court, or before any authority or person, on or after the appointed day (when this part of the Act came into force), unless they are enrolled as an advocate under this Act.
Practical Example: A person holds a law degree but has not paid the enrollment fee or taken the oath with their State Bar Council. They cannot legally charge a client to appear in court, nor can they file a petition on a client’s behalf, as they are not yet an enrolled advocate.

This gives High Courts the right to regulate the local practice of advocates.

What it says in simple English: The High Court has the authority to create rules that set the conditions under which an advocate will be permitted to practice both in the High Court itself and in all courts that are subordinate (lower) to it.
Practical Example: The Calcutta High Court issues a rule mandating that advocates practicing before it must wear a specific gown style and must not address the judge while seated. These are local conditions of practice set by the High Court.

What it says in simple English: The High Court must create rules for setting and controlling (by means of taxation or other methods) the fees that a party has to pay as legal costs to their opponent’s advocate in all proceedings, both in the High Court and in subordinate courts.
Practical Example: In a property dispute settled in a subordinate court, the High Court’s rules define the maximum fee that the winning party can claim from the losing party to cover their advocate’s fee (known as “cost of suit”).

What it says in simple English: Without limiting the powers in Sub-section (1), the Calcutta High Court specifically had the power to make rules to arrange for the Intermediate and Final examinations for ‘articled clerks’ (trainee lawyers under the old system), as this was needed for the specific group of people mentioned in Section 58AG to be admitted as advocates.
Practical Example: This was a special provision to manage the final transition of those who were already undergoing training as articled clerks in Calcutta under the old rules when the 1961 Act was passed, allowing them a pathway to full enrollment.