New Delhi, July 15, 2025 — The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday sought responses from the Union government. It also sought responses from the Bar Council of India (BCI) on a public interest litigation (PIL). The PIL seeks safeguards to protect the privileges and safety of advocates across the country.
[Aaditya Gore v. Union of India & Ors.]
The petition was filed by advocate Aaditya Gore. It calls on the BCI and State Bar Councils to frame rules under Section 7(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961. These rules aim to protect legal practitioners’ rights. The petition also requests the constitution of grievance redressal committees under Section 10(3) to address such matters uniformly.
A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice to the Centre and the BCI. The PIL was tagged with a pending suo motu case. This case was initiated recently by the top court after investigating agencies summoned lawyers for professional advice. These agencies summoned them for advice rendered to their clients. The matter drew national attention when the Enforcement Directorate (ED) summoned Senior Advocates Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal.
Repeated Appeals Ignored for Over a Decade
Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Nishant R. Katneshwarkar informed the Court. He stated that Gore has been pursuing the matter with both the Centre and the BCI for nearly 11 years. However, there has been no formal response or action.
According to the plea, the Advocates (Protection) Bill is still pending. Despite repeated appeals, no mechanism exists within State Bar Councils. They do not deal with violations of lawyers’ privileges or safety concerns.
Connect with us on Instagram – X – LinkedIn for daily updates, quizzes, and other materials.
Alarming Rise in Attacks on Lawyers
The petition details over a dozen recent incidents of violence, threats, and harassment against advocates. These incidents have occurred across states such as Delhi, Maharashtra, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh. These incidents, it argues, have had a chilling effect on the legal profession and undermine the administration of justice.
“The repeated attacks on Advocates undermine not only the personal dignity of individual advocates but also the dignity of the administration of justice,” the petition states.
The PIL highlights an urgent need for institutional safeguards. These safeguards ensure that legal professionals can carry out their duties without fear or coercion.
Reliefs Sought in the Petition
The petitioner has requested the Supreme Court to:
- Direct the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils to frame rules under Section 7(d) of the Advocates Act to protect lawyers’ privileges;
- Constitute a uniform grievance redressal mechanism under Section 10(3) of the Act;
- Pending the framing of such rules, treat complaints of breach of privileges under the modalities provided for disciplinary proceedings in BCI rules.
Gore has clarified that the petition does not seek new legislation. Instead, it calls for action under the existing legal framework of the Advocates Act, 1961.
The PIL was filed through Advocate-on-Record Ganu Suvarna Siddhanath. The matter is expected to be heard along with the related suo motu case in the coming weeks.
Also Read
MP High Court Orders Photo Documentation of Crime Injuries to Prevent Misuse
