On 20th January, the Supreme Court bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan will deliberate whether an Advocate on Record (AoR) bears the obligation to inform their client about their designation as a Senior Advocate, thereby enabling the client to make alternative arrangements to engage another lawyer for filing a vakalatnama.

The Court directed the Registrar (Judicial) to furnish a comprehensive report, providing details of either a specific rule or a practice direction that mandates issuing a notice to a litigant represented by an Advocate on Record who has been designated as a Senior Advocate. The matter under consideration is whether such an Advocate on Record has a duty to inform their client to make alternative arrangements.

The instant issue arose from an appeal filed by State of Madhya Pradesh against an acquittal of a man in a criminal case, in which the advocate appearing for the State called attention of the bench to the office report that recorded the AoR’s designation as a Senior Advocate, thereby requiring an issuance of notice from the court to the Respondent to make alternative arrangement.

The office report indicated that the Respondent was previously represented by Advocate Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, who has since been designated as a Senior Advocate. Consequently, an alternative arrangement notice has been issued to the Respondent.

The bench observed that instances where the Court is compelled to issue notices to litigants to engage another AoR due to their current AoR being designated as a Senior Advocate have become increasingly frequent. Expressing concern over this recurring issue, Justice Oka stressed that such practices need to be addressed and brought to an end.

The matter is now listed on January 20, 2025 for further hearing.

Case Title: The State Of Madhya Pradesh v. Dileep., Crl.A. No. 1364 / 2015