Introduction
According to the Advocates Act, 1961, only advocates are entitled to practice law. Every advocate whose name is entered on the state rolls has the statutory right to practice throughout the territories to which the Advocates Act 1961 extends. An advocate may practice in all the courts including the Supreme Court, before any tribunal or person, legally authorized to take evidence and before any other authority or person before whom such advocate is, by or under any law for the time being in force, entitled to practice.
Rights of an Advocate
Advocates have sure privileges as officers of the court, for eg, even if a litigant conducts his case without the aid of counsel, he cannot claim a right to be seated in court at equal standing with all advocates. Even among advocates, certain special privileges have been conferred on those holding special positions and rankings.
A person who is not an advocate cannot claim to plead for another in court as of right. Any person, who practices in any court or before any authority or person, in or before whom he is not entitled to practice under the provisions of the Advocates Act 1961, will be punished with imprisonment for a term which can be up to six months’.
There is a case N.K. Bajpai vs Union of India & Anr on 15th March 2012, In this case the court gave an order regarding the rights of an Advocate. that the profession Under Section 29 of the Advocates Act, only one class of persons is entitled to practice the profession of law, namely, advocates. Section thirty of the Advocates Act provides that subject to the provisions of the Act, every advocate whose name is entered in the State rolls shall, as a matter of right, be entitled to follow throughout the territories to that this Act applies, in all courts including the Supreme Court of India. Such associate degree Advocate would even be entitled to practice before any court or person lawfully approved to take proof and before the other authority or person before whom such an advocate is, by or under any law for the time being in force, entitled to practice.
Section thirty-three of the Advocates Act any states that except as otherwise provided in this Act or in the other law for the nonce operative, no person shall, on or once the appointed day, be entitled to practice in any court or before any authority or person unless he is enrolled as an Advocate under the Advocates Act. A bare reading of these three provisions clearly shows that this is a statutory right given to an advocate to practice and an advocate alone is the person who can practice before the courts, tribunals, authorities and persons. But this right is statutorily regulated by 2 conditions – one, that a -person’s name should be on the State rolls and second, that he should be permitted by the law for the time being in effect, to practice before any authority or person.
Where the advocate contains a right to seem before associate degree authority or an individual, that right can be denied by a law that may be framed by the competent Legislature. Thus, the correct to follow isn’t associate degree absolute right that is freed from restriction and is with no limitation. There are persons like Mukhtiars and others, who were earlier entitled to practice before the Courts, but the Advocates Act itself took away the right to practice which was available to them before its coming into force.
