Systemic Disparity within the Legal Fraternity in India
The Supreme Court of India, in a recent decision, has revised the methodology and criteria for designating senior lawyers, based on the case Jitender @ Kalla vs State (Govt.) of NCT Of Delhi (2025). This decision revisits the judgments in the Indira Jaising vs Supreme Court of India cases of 2017 and 2023, directing High Courts to frame new rules in light of the judgment delivered on May 13, 2025.
Impact on Judicial and Political Democracy
- The legal profession in India has a public character, and disparities within it can affect both judicial and political democracy.
- The legal system is seen as a plutocracy perpetuated by both political and judicial wings.
- The Advocates Act, 1961 classifies lawyers into senior advocates and advocates based on ability, standing, or special knowledge, which is inherently problematic.
U.S. Influence and Concerns
- A Reuters report, "The Echo Chamber" (2014), highlighted how an elite group of lawyers in the U.S. had a disproportionate influence on the law.
- In the U.S., a small percentage of lawyers handled a large share of Supreme Court appeals, often representing corporate interests.
- India's legal system is vulnerable to similar disparities and must guard against growing inequality.
Judicial Response and Criticism
- The Indira Jaising judgment (2017) attempted to reform existing practices but failed to address fundamental issues within Section 16 of the Advocates Act.
- The Jitender case reaffirmed the validity of controversial clauses but called for peripheral reforms, maintaining the application system with new High Court rules.
- Court judgments have not revisited core contentions about the arbitrary and discriminatory classification of lawyers.
Historical and Social Context
- The Indian legal profession has roots in the country's freedom struggle, led by socially conscious lawyers.
- Despite historical movements towards socialism and egalitarianism, the classification practice persists, influenced by jurisdictions like Nigeria, Australia, and others.
Current Challenges and Inequality
- F.S. Nariman criticized the development of a caste-like system among lawyers.
- Many eligible and deserving lawyers remain unnoticed, overshadowed by "star lawyers." This monopolization leads to intellectual apartheid and negates judicial diversity.
- Key national issues are often decided by submissions from a select few, making litigation a privilege for the rich, contrary to India's constitutional ideals.
Kaleeswaram Raj, a Supreme Court lawyer, highlights the need for the legal profession to embrace equality and diversity to truly uphold justice within India’s constitutional framework.