The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, Srinagar Bench, clarified that the Bar Council of India (BCI)'s rules for dress code for women advocates does not permit them to appear in court with their faces covered.

This observation arose from a case seeking to quash a domestic violence complaint, initially heard by Justice Rahul Bharti and later by Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi.

On 27th November, 2024, a woman claiming to be Advocate Syed Ainain Qadri, representing the petitioners, appeared before the High Court with her face covered, despite wearing the proper advocate attire. When Justice Rahul Bharti requested her to remove the face covering, she argued it was her fundamental right to do so. However, the Court refused to acknowledge her as counsel for the petitioners, citing the inability to verify her identity.

As stated in the order dated 27th November, 2024, Justice Bharti remarked, "This court does not entertain the appearance of the person identifying herself to be Advocate Ms. Syed Ainain Qadri as counsel for the petitioners as this Court has no basis/occasion to confirm her actual identity both as a person as well as professional."

The Court then adjourned the case and instructed the Registrar General to verify if any rule permitted women advocates to appear with their faces covered or to refuse a court's request to remove their face covering. The Registrar General submitted a report on 5th December, 2024.

Upon reviewing the Registrar General's findings, Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi, on 6th December, 2024, noted that the BCI rules did not provide any such right. Section 49(1)(gg) of Chapter IV (Part VI) of the Bar Council of India Rules outlines the dress code for women advocates as follows:

a) "Black full sleeve jacket or blouse, white collar, stiff or soft, with white bands and Advocates’ Gowns. White blouse, with or without collar, with white bands and with a black open breasted coat.

b) Sarees or long skirts (white or black or any mellow or subdued colour without any print or design) or flares (white, black or black striped or gray) or Punjabi dress, Churidar-Kurta or Shalwar-Kurta with or without Dupatta (white or black) or traditional dress with black coat and bands.

c) Wearing of Advocates’ gown shall be optional except when appearing in the Supreme Court or in High Courts.

d) Except in Supreme Court and High Courts during summer, wearing of black coat is not mandatory."

After considering the BCI rules, the Court concluded, "It is nowhere stated in the rules that any such attire is permissible for appearing before this Court."

Additionally, the Court noted that Ms. Syed Ainain Qadri did not appear, and another lawyer represented the petitioners. As a result, the Court decided not to pursue the matter further, and the case for quashing a domestic violence complaint was reserved for judgment.

On 13th December, 2024, the Court dismissed the case, determining that an alternative remedy was available.

Case Details: Mohammad Yasin Khan and ors. Vs. Nazia Iqbal CRM(M) No. 704/2024 (Order dt. 06th December, 2024).

Mohammad Yasin Khan and ors. Vs. Nazia Iqbal CRM(M) No. 704/2024 (Order dt. 27th November, 2024).

Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Salih Pirzada.

Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Jahangir Iqbal Ganai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Adil.