Only arguing counsel, AoR and one assisting counsel can have their names recorded in order, says SC

New Delhi: In a move that could impact court proceedings, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that only lawyers physically present and arguing a case can have their names recorded in court orders. A bench comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma clarified that apart from the arguing counsel, only one assisting lawyer and the advocate-on-record (AoR) would be allowed to have their appearances marked in proceedings.

The directive mandates court masters to ensure that appearances are recorded strictly for senior advocates, AoRs, or arguing lawyers who are present in court. Additionally, one lawyer assisting the arguing counsel or AoR may also be listed. The Court also reaffirmed that senior advocates must be accompanied by an AoR when appearing before the Supreme Court. Previously, the practice allowed multiple lawyers, including those assisting with research and drafting, to have their names included in court records, regardless of whether they were present or actively arguing. The bench noted that in some cases, names were marked without verification of attendance or authorization to appear.

"We observed that numerous lawyers' names were being recorded without confirmation of their presence or authority to appear. While any advocate enrolled with a Bar Council has the right to appear in the Supreme Court, such appearances must comply with the rules set by the Court," Justice Trivedi stated. The ruling effectively limits the number of assisting counsel and modifies a long-standing practice in the Supreme Court. The bench emphasized that court procedures must strictly adhere to established rules, ensuring compliance from both advocates and court officers. Additionally, the Court issued guidelines concerning the execution of vakalatnamas. It stated that an AoR must certify the execution of a vakalatnama when present during the signing. If the document has already been executed before a notary or another advocate, the AoR must verify its authenticity before accepting it. Further, the advocate-on-record must submit necessary details through the designated online portal, as per Supreme Court guidelines.

This decision follows an inquiry ordered in September 2024 after a litigant claimed he had never engaged lawyers who had filed a special leave petition (SLP) on his behalf. The revelation prompted the bench to direct AoRs to ensure that only authorized lawyers' names are marked in court records. Following this, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) had sought a modification of the order. Both SCBA and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) were heard on the matter before the final ruling was issued.