The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Bar Council of India (BCI) on petitions challenging its Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2022.
The Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela granted two weeks’ time to BCI to file a detailed counter-affidavit on petitions filed by Dentons Link Legal and CMS IndusLaw.
The petitioners questioned the constitutional and statutory legitimacy of the 2022 regulatory framework, contending that the BCI lacks the legislative competence to allow foreign lawyers and foreign law firms to practise in India.
They placed reliance on Section 49 of the Advocates Act, arguing that the provision does not confer any authority upon the BCI to regulate cross-border legal practice or to liberalise market access for foreign entities.
The petitioners further contended that Section 49(1)(c) and (e) make prior approval from the CJI or the Central government a mandatory prerequisite for any rule impacting the practice of law—a condition they assert has not been fulfilled.
BCI apprised the High Court that its Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2022 were enacted within the scope of its rule-making authority under the Advocates Act, 1961, and did not require prior approval from either the Chief Justice of India or the Central government.
During the hearing, the Bench reiterated concerns over the internal structure of the Rules, particularly the provisions enabling the BCI to impose severe sanctions on law firms on the basis of a preliminary inquiry without affording procedural safeguards typically associated with adjudicatory proceedings under administrative law. The Court indicated that several clauses appear inconsistent, overbroad, and lacking in procedural discipline, creating a regulatory ecosystem vulnerable to arbitrary enforcement.
The petitions also challenged the BCI Rules on constitutional grounds, alleging violations of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21.
They argued that the framework introduces discriminatory classifications, imposes unreasonable restrictions on the right to practise a profession, and fails to ensure due process. They further contended that the BCI Rules created ambiguity by comprehensively regulating foreign law firms while entirely omitting a statutory definition of an Indian law firm, undermining regulatory certainty and equal treatment.
The matter also stems from show-cause notices issued by the BCI to the petitioner firms for alleged collaborations or operational linkages with foreign entities, purportedly in contravention of the 2022 framework. The notices, according to the petitioners, exemplified the overreach and vagueness of the impugned regulatory regime.
The BCI apprised the Bench that a consultation process was underway and that it was considering revisions to the framework. The Court, however, observed that the existing regime requires comprehensive redrafting to meet standards of legal clarity, consistency, and procedural fairness.
The Bench granted the BCI two weeks to file a detailed counter-affidavit. Its earlier interim direction restraining the Council from taking any final action pursuant to the ongoing proceedings will continue to operate until further orders. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing in January.
The post Delhi HC issues notice to BCI on petitions challenging Foreign Lawyers Rules, 2022 appeared first on India Legal.