The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice to the Union government, the Bar Council of India (BCI), State Bar Councils and the University Grants Commission (UGC) on a writ petition filed by the Bar Association of India (BAI) seeking creation of a nationwide digital mechanism to verify advocates and curb fake legal practitioners, along with a regulatory framework governing lawyers’ conduct on social media.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana directed the respondents to file their replies and listed the matter for further hearing in July.
The petitioner sought the establishment of a National Digital Registry for the Legal Profession of India (NDRLP), which would function as a centralised database of enrolled advocates. The proposed system includes issuance of a unique national advocate identifier, real-time verification of enrolment status, access to disciplinary records, and QR-code-enabled public profiles to allow courts, litigants and authorities to instantly verify credentials.
It further sought directions to BCI to frame a binding social media and digital conduct code for advocates under Section 49 of the Advocates Act, 1961, regulating online speech, prohibiting promotional content and misrepresentation, and introducing structured consequences for violations. The plea further sought a mandatory pre-enrolment online course on professional ethics and digital conduct.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice observed that the proposal appeared to be technology-driven and potentially implementable, but indicated that effective implementation would require coordination with law universities, State Bar Councils and other institutional stakeholders to ensure accurate data verification at the source.
The Bench also indicated that law universities may need to be brought on record to enable verification of academic credentials, although the counsel for the petitioner suggested that impleading all universities at the initial stage could delay the process. The Court agreed that it would be appropriate to first develop a workable framework or module before expanding implementation nationwide.
The Court permitted the petitioner to place a supplementary policy note detailing the proposed mechanism for consideration. It also indicated that an earlier committee constituted to examine issues of advocate verification may require reconstitution or fresh examination, while noting that effective action at the appropriate time could have prevented the present concerns.
At the outset, the CJI described the proposal for a national registry as an innovative idea that could be enabled through technological infrastructure. However, the Bench emphasised that any such system would require institutional cooperation across regulatory bodies.
During the hearing, the Court also referred to concerns arising from content circulating on social media platforms involving legal professionals. The Chief Justice noted that the Court had come across instances of inappropriate online remarks that appeared unconnected to legal discourse and suggested that some individuals engaging in such conduct may not even be enrolled advocates.
The Bench, however, clarified that members of the Bar were generally governed by professional ethics and act responsibly, and that misconduct online should not be presumed to represent the legal profession as a whole.
The petitioner argued that while public users and advocates may both engage on digital platforms, statements made by advocates carry professional authority and are perceived differently, thereby necessitating regulatory safeguards.
The petitioner highlighted that India has approximately 1.8 million enrolled advocates, but the existing enrolment system is fragmented across State Bar Councils without a unified, real-time verification framework. It argued that this lack of interoperability has created systemic opacity, allowing instances of fraudulent enrolment to go undetected.
The proposed NDRLP is intended to integrate enrolment records, disciplinary history and qualification verification into a single digital infrastructure, along with a law degree verification system linked to the UGC and recognised law universities.
The petition further sought the constitution of a monitoring committee, preferably headed by a retired Supreme Court judge, to supervise implementation and submit periodic compliance reports. It further highlighted concerns over social media practices among lawyers, alleging that certain digital content may amount to solicitation in violation of the Bar Council of India Rules, including promotional content relating to court appearances and professional branding.
The post Supreme Court issues notice on plea seeking national digital registry of advocates to curb fake lawyers appeared first on India Legal.