Q.1: Consider the following statements regarding BCI Rules on Professional Standards:
(a) Rules regarding professional standards and etiquette of advocates are contained in Chapter II, Part VI of the BCI Rules.
(b) These rules are framed under Section 49(1)(c) of the Advocates Act, 1961.
(c) These rules apply to all employees of the Bar Council of India.
How many of the statements written above are correct?
Options:
- only one
- only two
- all three
- none of the above
Key and explanation: Option 2 (only two) is correct.
(a) Correct → Professional standards & etiquette are in Part VI, Chapter II of BCI Rules.
(b) Correct → BCI makes these rules under Section 49(1)(c), Advocates Act 1961.
(c) Wrong → Rules apply to advocates, not employees of the Bar Council.
Q.2: Consider the following situations regarding the professional conduct of advocates under the BCI Rules:
(a) Krunal, an advocate, shouts at a judge in open court, accuses the court of fraud and threatens the judge after an adverse order.
(b) Alie Shah, an advocate, privately meets the judge in his chamber to discuss the merits of a pending case without the presence of the opposite party and later claims it was not a private communication.
(c) Veenayak, an advocate, appears before the High Court without wearing a band and gown and argues that the dress code for lawyers violates his freedom of expression under Article 19 of the Constitution.
(d) Niharita, an advocate, respectfully requests an adjournment due to genuine difficulty and maintains courtesy towards the court and the opposite counsel even when the opposite counsel uses rude language.
Which of the above amount(s) to professional misconduct?
options:
1. only (a), (b), & (c)
2. only (a) & (b)
3. only (d)
4. all the above statements
Key and explanation: option (1) is correct.
BCI Rules — (Part VI, Chapter II: Standards of Professional Conduct & Etiquette)
(a) Krunal — shouting, accusing fraud, threatening judge
Rule No.: Rule 1 – The advocate shall maintain dignity and respect towards the court.
Rule No.: Rule 2 – Shall not influence or intimidate the court and must not use scandalous language.
➡ Professional Misconduct ✔
(b) Alie Shah — private meeting with judge in pending case
Rule No.: Rule 3 – The advocate shall not communicate in private with a judge relating to a pending case (no ex-parte communication).
➡ Professional Misconduct ✔
(c) Veenayak — refusal to wear band & gown
Rule No.: Rule 5 – Advocate shall appear in court only in the prescribed dress (advocate’s uniform).While in
➡ Professional Misconduct ✔
(d) Niharita — polite behaviour and genuine adjournment request
Rule No.: Rule 36 (read with general duty of fairness and courtesy to colleagues and court) – Advocate must maintain courtesy and fairness.
➡ Not misconduct ✘
Q.3. With reference to the judicial pronouncements related to the conduct of advocates, consider the following pairs:
Case Principle : Ruling
- In Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (1995): Shouting at a judge or threatening them amounts to misconduct.
- Prayag Das v. Civil Judge (1973): Prescribing a dress code for lawyers violates Article 19 (Freedom of Expression).
- R.K. Anand v. Registrar, Delhi HC (2009): Attempting to influence a witness or court process is a violation of the rule against private influence.
Which of the pairs given above is/are correctly matched?
Options:
- only (1) & (2) only
- Only (1) & (3) only
- Only (2) & (3) only
- None
Key and explanation: option (2) is correct.
- In Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (1995) ✔
Threatening / shouting at judge = professional misconduct + criminal contempt
Correct BCI Rules (Part VI, Ch. II, Sec. I — Duty to Court):
Rule 1: Act in a dignified manner before the court
Rule 2: Maintain respectful attitude toward the court
(Also: Sec. 35 Advocates Act, 1961; Sec. 2(c) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971) - Prayag Das v. Civil Judge (1973) ✘
Dress code valid; NOT violation of Art. 19.
BCI Rule (Dress):
Part VI, Chapter IV — Rule 1: Dress & appearance of advocates (black coat, band, gown where prescribed)
(Framed under Sec. 49 Advocates Act) - R.K. Anand v. Registrar, Delhi High Court (2009) ✔
Influencing witness/trial = misconduct & contempt
BCI Rules (Duty to Court):
Rule 3: Shall not influence decision by illegal or improper means
Rule 4: Shall not communicate privately with a judge regarding a pending case
Rule 15: Shall not appear in matters involving conflict or misuse of process (read with fairness to witnesses/justice)
Also Sec. 2(c)(ii) Contempt of Courts Act — interference with judicial proceeding
Q.4: With reference to Rule 4 of the Bar Council of India Rules, consider the following statement:
“An advocate is responsible only for their own actions and cannot be held accountable if their client independently resorts to sharp or unfair practices.”
Is this statement correct?
(a) Yes, because the client is the master of the suit and acts independently.
(b) Yes, because an advocate’s duty is limited to legal representation, not moral policing.
(c) No, because the advocate has a positive duty to use their best efforts to restrain and prevent the client from unfair practices.
(d) No, because the advocate is legally liable for all criminal acts committed by their client.
Key and Explanation: Answer: (c)
BCI RULES: Part VI (Rule 4) explicitly places a duty on the advocate to “use his best efforts to restrain and prevent his client” from doing anything the advocate themselves ought not to do (like unfair practices). An advocate cannot simply say, “My client did it, not me.”
Q.5: The Bar Council of India Rules explicitly link the “Respectful Attitude” of an advocate to a broader societal necessity. According to the text of the rule, the dignity of the judicial office is essential for which of the following?
- (a) The efficient disposal of cases and reduction of pendency.
- (b) The survival of a free community.
- (c) The protection of the client’s fundamental rights against the State.
- (d) The upholding of the Constitution’s basic structure doctrine.
Key and Explanation: Answer: (b)
Reasoning: This is a direct recall question based on the text of BCI Rules – Part VI, Rule 2, which states, “An advocate shall maintain towards the courts a respectful attitude, bearing in mind that the dignity of the judicial office is essential for the survival of a free community.”
Q.6: Consider the following statements regarding the Bar Council of India (BCI) under the Advocates Act, 1961:
(a) The Bar Council of India is constituted under Section 4 of the Act.
(b) The Attorney-General for India and the Additional Solicitor-General of India are ex-officio members of the BCI.
(c) The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the BCI are elected for a fixed term of one year.
(d) The Bar Council of India is a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Options:
1. (a) and (d) only
2. (a), (b) and (d) only
3. (b), (c) and (d) only
4. None
Key and Explanation: Correct Answer: Option 1 — (a) and (d) only
Under the Advocates Act, 1961:
(a) ✔ Correct — Section 4: Constitution of Bar Council of India.
(b) ✘ Incorrect — Section 4(1)(a): Ex-officio members are the Attorney-General of India and Solicitor-General of India only (not the Additional SG).
(c) ✘ Incorrect — Section 4(2): Chairman & Vice-Chairman are elected, but no fixed 1-year term is provided in the Act.
(d) ✔ Correct — Section 5: BCI is a body corporate with perpetual succession and a common seal.
Q.7: Consider the following statements regarding State Bar Councils under the Advocates Act, 1961:
1. State Bar Councils are constituted under Section 3 of the Act.
2. The Advocate-General of the State is an ex-officio member of the State Bar Council.
3. Where the electorate exceeds 10,000 advocates, a maximum of 20 members are elected to the State Bar Council.
4. Elections to State Bar Councils are conducted by the system of proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Options:
1. (a) and (d) only
2. (a), (b) and (d) only
3. (b), (c) and (d) only
4. None
Key and Explanation: Answer: Option 2. (a), (b) and (d) only
Statement (a) — Correct
Section 3 → Constitution of State Bar Councils.
Statement (b) — Correct
Advocate-General = ex-officio member.
Statement (c) — Incorrect
Law does not say “maximum 20 members”.
Actual rule (Sec. 3(2)):
Up to 5,000 advocates → 15 members
5,000–10,000 → 20 members
Above 10,000 → 25 members
Statement (d) — Correct
Election method = Proportional Representation by Single Transferable Vote (PRSTV)
(NOT first-past-the-post).
Q.8. Harish Vardhan is a practicing lawyer. His father-in-law has just been appointed as a District Judge in the same court complex where Harish practices.
According to BCI Rules -Part VI (Rules of Professional Standards), Chapter II, what is Harish Vardhan restricted from doing?
(A) Harish can appear before his father-in-law provided he discloses the relationship to the opposing counsel.
(B) Harish cannot appear, act, or plead in that specific court where his father-in-law is the presiding officer.
(C) Harish must transfer his practice to a different state entirely.
(D) There is no restriction; the judge is expected to be unbiased.
Key and Explanation:Correct Answer: (B)
The Rule: This situation is governed by Rule 6 of the Bar Council of India (BCI) Rules (Part VI, Chapter II, Section I – Duty to the Court).
The Restriction: An advocate is strictly prohibited from practicing or appearing before any judicial authority if the presiding officer is related to them.
Specified Relationships: The rule explicitly lists “father-in-law” as one of the prohibited relationships (along with father, son, wife, brother, etc.).
Objective: This ensures the impartiality of the judiciary and prevents any conflict of interest or bias in the administration of justice.
Q. 9: A client approaches Maheema, an advocate, to fight a property dispute case. The client cannot pay fees upfront, so Maheema agrees to take the case on the condition that if they win, she will keep 30% of the property’s market value as her fee.
Under BCI Rules Part VI (Rules of Professional Standards), is this arrangement valid for Maheema?
A) Yes, this is a standard “contingency fee” arrangement.
B) Yes, provided the agreement is in writing.
C) No, an advocate should not act in a matter in which she has a pecuniary (financial) interest.
D) No, unless the Bar Council gives special permission.
Key and Explanation: Correct answer (C)
•Rule 20 (BCI Rules, Part VI, Chapter II): Explicitly prohibits an advocate from stipulating a fee that is contingent on the results of the litigation or agreeing to share the proceeds of the case.
•Rule 9 (BCI Rules, Part VI, Chapter II): States that an advocate should not act or plead in any matter in which they have a pecuniary (financial) interest.
•Contingency Fees are Illegal: In India, agreements where a lawyer takes a percentage of the property or winnings (champerty) are strictly void and amount to professional misconduct.
•Conflict of Interest: Taking a share of the property gives the lawyer a personal financial stake in the outcome, compromising their role as an officer of the court.
Property Dispute Fee (Contingency Fee)
Key Case Law: B. Sunitha v. State of Telangana (2018)
The Ruling: The Supreme Court held that an advocate’s fee cannot be based on a percentage of the result of the litigation.
Reasoning: The Court declared that demanding a percentage of the “decretal amount” (compensation or property won) is illegal and amounts to “professional misconduct.”
Q.10: Shivank Teewari, an advocate, is representing a client in a criminal case. The client is granted bail, but the client’s family is out of town and cannot sign the surety bond immediately. The client asks Shivank to sign as the surety to get him released quickly.
As per BCI Part VI (Rules of Professional Standards),Rule 10, can Shivank Teewari do this?
A) Yes, an advocate must do everything possible to help their client.
B) No, an advocate shall not stand as a surety or certify the soundness of a surety for his client.
C) Yes, but only for a temporary period of 24 hours.
D) No, unless the client pays a specific “Surety Fee” to Shivank.
Key and Explanation: Correct Answer: (B)
Related Rule: BCI Rules Part VI, Chapter II, Rule 10 (Duty to the Client).
Prohibition: The rule explicitly states that an advocate cannot become a surety (guarantor) for their own client in legal proceedings.
Reasoning: This rule exists to prevent the lawyer from becoming personally and financially liable for the client’s actions or appearance in court, which would compromise their professional independence.
Q.11: Consider the following statements Regarding BCI RULES (Part VI):
(a) Swarnima applies for enrollment as an advocate. The State Bar Council scrutinizes her qualifications and enters her name in the roll of advocates.
(b) A complaint of professional misconduct is filed against Nidhya Gupta, an advocate. The State Bar Council refers the matter to its Disciplinary Committee for inquiry.
(c) The Bar Council of India decides to directly record evidence and punish Pararthmesh, an advocate, for misconduct without the matter first being dealt with by the State Bar Council.
(d) Goonjan Singh, an engineer, files a criminal cheating complaint against Niraj, an advocate, and requests the Bar Council to conduct the criminal trial.
Which of the above are correct as per the Advocates Act, 1961?
Options:
A.Only (a) & (b)
B..Only (a), (b) & (c)
C.Only (b), (c) & (d)
D.(a), (b), (c) & (d)
Key and Explanation: Correct Answer:
Option 1: (a) & (b)
Brief Explanation of Statements:
(a) Correct: Enrollment is a State Function.
Under Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961, the State Bar Council is the authority that scrutinizes applications and enrolls qualified persons as advocates on its roll. The Bar Council of India (BCI) lays down the rules, but the State Council executes the enrollment.
(b) Correct: Disciplinary Power lies with State First.
Under Section 35, when a complaint of professional misconduct is received, the State Bar Council refers the case to its Disciplinary Committee for inquiry. This is the standard procedure.
(c) Incorrect: BCI is primarily an Appellate Authority.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) usually hears appeals against State Bar Council orders (Section 37). While the BCI has original jurisdiction in specific cases (e.g., if a State Council fails to dispose of a case within a year, per Section 36B), it does not generally “directly record evidence and punish” without the matter first being seized by or transferred from the State Council.
(d) Incorrect: Criminal Trials are separate.
A criminal complaint for cheating (Section 420 IPC) is a matter for the Criminal Courts (Magistrate), not the Bar Council. The Bar Council deals with professional misconduct, not criminal trials for cheating.
Important Case Law:
Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998): The Supreme Court clarified that the power to punish for professional misconduct rests with the Bar Councils (State and BCI) under the Advocates Act, while the power to punish for Contempt of Court rests with the Judiciary. This distinguishes the roles of the Courts vs. the Bar Councils.
Noratanman Courtois v. M.R. Rajput (2004): The Supreme Court emphasized that the BCI’s disciplinary jurisdiction is largely appellate or acts as a safeguard when State Councils fail to act within the statutory time limit.
Q.12:Assertion (A): The State Bar Council is empowered to admit persons as advocates and maintain the roll of advocates.
Reason (R): Under the Advocates Act, 1961, the function of enrolment of advocates is specifically entrusted to the State Bar Councils.
Options:
A. Both A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A
B. Both A and R are correct but R is not the correct explanation of A
C. A is correct but R is incorrect
D. A is incorrect but R is correct
Key and explanation: Correct Option: (A)Both A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A.
Explanation:
Assertion (A): True. The State Bar Council admits advocates.
Reason (R): True. The Advocates Act, 1961 specifically assigns the function of enrollment to the State Bar Councils (Section 24), which is the direct legal basis for the Assertion.
Relevant Sections:
Section 6(1)(a): Explicitly states that one of the functions of the State Bar Council is “to admit persons as advocates on its roll.”
Section 24: Details the qualifications for “Persons who may be admitted as advocates on a State roll.”
Important Case Law:
V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India (1999): The Supreme Court held that the State Bar Council has the primary statutory power to enroll advocates under Section 24, and the BCI cannot impose additional conditions (like pre-enrollment training) that override the Act.
Q.13: Match the following case laws with the correct legal principle relating to the functions and disciplinary control of Bar Councils under the Advocates Act, 1961:
List I (Cases)
(a) Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar
(b) Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India
(c) V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India
List II (Principles)
(i) Disciplinary jurisdiction over advocates primarily lies with Bar Council authorities
(ii) Bar Council of India cannot impose additional enrolment training requirements beyond the Act
(iii) Purpose and scope of disciplinary proceedings and control over professional misconduct of advocates
Options: A. (a)-(iii), (b)-(i), (c)-(ii)
B. (a)-(i), (b)-(iii), (c)-(ii)
C. (a)-(iii), (b)-(ii), (c)-(i)
D. (a)-(ii), (b)-(iii), (c)-(i)
Key and Explanation: The correct answer is Option A: (a)-(iii), (b)-(i), (c)-(ii).
Cases:
(a) M.V. Dabholkar case: Established the Bar Council’s role in handling professional misconduct and maintaining standards.
(b) Supreme Court Bar Association case: Ruled that disciplinary power (like suspending a license) belongs to the Bar Council, not the Court (under contempt).
(c) V. Sudeer case: Ruled that the Bar Council cannot create new training rules for enrolment that aren’t in the Advocates Act.
Q.14: Consider the following statements regarding Bar Council Committees (Sections 9 & 10, Advocates Act, 1961):
(a) Every Bar Council must constitute a Disciplinary Committee
(b) Disciplinary Committee deals with cases of professional misconduct
(c) Members of the Disciplinary Committee are elected by the advocates of the State directly
(d) Bar Council may constitute other committees for its functions
Options:
A. Only (a) & (b)
B. Only (a), (b) & (d)
C. Only (c) & (d)
D. (a), (b), (c) & (d)
Key and Explanation: Correct Option: (B) only(a), (b) & (d)
•Statements (a) & (b) are Correct: Section 9 mandates that every Bar Council must constitute one or more Disciplinary Committees to handle professional misconduct cases.
•Statement (d) is Correct: Section 10 allows Bar Councils to form other necessary committees (like Executive or Enrolment Committees).
•Statement (c) is Incorrect: Members of the Disciplinary Committee are not elected directly by the advocates of the State. They are selected by the Bar Council from its own members (plus one co-opted member).
Q.15: Advocate Rickki is a renowned lawyer practicing in the Delhi High Court. A client approaches him with a brief for a standard civil suit in that court and offers a fee consistent with Rickki’s standing at the Bar. Rickki refuses the brief solely because he personally dislikes the client’s political ideology. Has Rickki violated any rule?
a) No, an advocate has absolute freedom to accept or reject any client.
b) Yes, he violated Rule 11(BCI, PART VI), which binds an advocate to accept a brief in the courts where he practices if the fee is appropriate.
c) No, because the relationship between a lawyer and client is purely personal.
d) Yes, but only if the client is from a vulnerable section of society.
Key and Explanation:Answer:b) Yes, he violated Rule 11(BCI, PART VI).
Rule 11 (often called the “Cab Rank Rule”) states that an advocate is bound to accept any brief in the courts or tribunals where he proposes to practice, provided the fee offered is consistent with his standing at the Bar and the nature of the case. He cannot refuse a brief without a valid or special reason (mere personal dislike is not a valid reason).
Q.16: Advocate Shayani, who has once accepted the brief and then wants to withdraw must:
(a) Have sufficient cause.
(b) Have given sufficient notice.
(c) Have refunded sufficient part of the fees.
(d) All of the above.
Key and Explanation: Answer:(d) All of the above.
According to Rule 12, Chapter II, Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules, an advocate cannot simply drop a case once accepted. To withdraw properly, they must satisfy three conditions:
1.There must be a valid reason (sufficient cause).
2.They must warn the client in advance (sufficient notice) so the client can find another lawyer.
3.They must return any unearned money (refund sufficient part of the fees).
Q.17: That nature of proceedings in the cases of professional misconduct:
a) Is criminal in nature.
b) Is quasi-criminal in nature.
c) Is civil in nature.
d) Neither civil or criminal.
Key and Explanaton: Answer: b) Is quasi-criminal in nature.
The Supreme Court of India, in the case of An Advocate v. Bar Council of India (1989), held that proceedings for professional misconduct are quasi-criminal. This means the standard of proof required is high (beyond reasonable doubt) because the advocate’s professional reputation and right to practice are at stake.
Q.18: Advocate Karppo is asked to file a lawsuit against Ms. Ananyya. Karppo happens to be a close business partner of Ms. Ananyya in a separate real estate venture. Karppo takes the case without telling his client about this relationship. Which BCI (PART VI) rule has Karppo violated?
a) Rule 11 (Duty to accept brief).
b) Rule 15 (Duty to uphold client interests).
c) Rule 14 (Duty to make full and frank disclosure).
d) Rule 12 (Duty regarding withdrawal).
Key and explanation: Answer: c) Rule 14 (Duty to make full and frank disclosure).
BCI Part VI Rule 14 mandates that an advocate must, at the commencement of his engagement, make a full and frank disclosure to the client of any connection he has with the parties (here, Ms.Ananyya) or any interest he has in the controversy. Failing to disclose this conflict of interest is a violation of the rule.
Q.19: Advocate Anisha Lakara accepted a brief for a criminal trial. Two days before the final arguments, she decides to withdraw from the case to attend a family function, giving her client no prior warning or time to arrange another lawyer. Which condition of BCI (PART VI) Rule 12 has she clearly violated?
a) Failure to refund the fee only.
b) Failure to give reasonable and sufficient notice.
c) Failure to obtain the Bar Council’s permission.
d) She has not violated any rule as advocates can withdraw at any time.
Key and Explanation: Answer:b) Failure to give reasonable and sufficient notice.
BCI PART VI ,Rule 12 states that an advocate cannot ordinarily withdraw from a case once accepted. If they must withdraw, they need sufficient cause AND must give reasonable and sufficient notice to the client so the client can find alternative representation. abandoning the client at a critical stage without notice is professional misconduct.
Q.20: Consider the following statements regarding the functioning of Bar Councils under Sections 12, 13, and 14 of the Advocates Act, 1961:
1. An act done by the Bar Council is deemed invalid if there was a vacancy in the Council at the time the act was performed.
2. No election of a member to a Bar Council can be called in question merely on the ground that due notice was not given to a voter, provided the notice was published in the Official Gazette at least 30 days before the election.
3. The accounts of the Bar Council must be audited by auditors appointed specifically by the State Government.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3
Key and Explanation: Answer: (b) 2 only
Statement 1 is Incorrect: Section 13 states that no act or proceeding of a Bar Council or any committee shall be called in question merely on the ground of the existence of any vacancy in the Council or committee.
Statement 2 is Correct: Section 14 provides protection to elections. It states that an election cannot be questioned merely for lack of notice to a specific person if the notice was published in the Official Gazette not less than 30 days before the date of election.
Statement 3 is Incorrect: Under Section 12, the accounts are to be audited by auditors appointed by the Bar Council itself (in accordance with rules made under Section 15(2)(m)), not by the State Government.
Q.21: With reference to Section 15 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (Power to make rules), consider the following statements:
A State Bar Council has the absolute power to make rules regarding the election of its members without any external approval.
The rules framed by a State Bar Council under Section 15 can prescribe the conditions of service for the Secretary and Accountant of the Council.
In the case of V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India (1999), the Supreme Court held that the rule-making power of State Bar Councils under Section 15 includes the power to prescribe pre-enrollment training for advocates.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 2 and 3 only
Key and Explanation:Answer:(b) 2 only
Statement 1 is Incorrect: According to Section 15(3) of the Advocates Act, no rules made by a State Bar Council shall have effect unless they have been approved by the Bar Council of India. They do not have absolute/independent power.
Statement 2 is Correct: Section 15(2)(k) explicitly allows the State Bar Council to make rules regarding the qualifications and conditions of service of the secretary, accountant, and other employees.
Statement 3 is Incorrect: In V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India (1999), the Supreme Court held that the State Bar Council cannot frame rules for pre-enrollment training under Section 15. The court ruled that defining eligibility and training conditions falls under the exclusive domain of the Bar Council of India (Section 24 and 49), not the State Councils.
