The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that Advocates-on-Record (AoRs) must mark the appearance of only those lawyers who are specifically authorized to appear and argue in a case on a given day [Bhagwan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others].
A Division Bench comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma emphasized that AoRs must inform the Court of the names of the appearing advocates for each hearing, as outlined in a 2022 notice. The Court clarified, “The notice only permits the Advocate-on-Record to mark the appearances of the advocates who are actually appearing in court—either the AoR or advocates who will argue the case on that specific hearing date.”
If there are any changes in the arguing advocate’s name, the AoR must notify the court master either beforehand or at the time of the hearing, and the court staff must act accordingly, the Court added.
This directive was issued in a case where a litigant denied filing a special leave petition (SLP) and claimed that the lawyers appearing on their behalf had not been hired by them. The Court, recognizing this as a “fraud committed on the courts,” ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the matter.
The Bench criticized how some advocates become involved in cases of dishonest litigants, aiding them in misusing legal processes for ulterior motives. During an earlier hearing on August 28, the Court had raised concerns over multiple advocates’ names appearing on order sheets for a single party, prompting an inquiry into the registry’s practice of including so many names.
The Court referred to a December 2022 notice, which instructed AoRs to mark only the appearances of advocates who are authorized to argue. It also cited an August 29 ruling stating that only lawyers physically or virtually present during hearings may have their appearances recorded.
The Court reiterated, “The AoR must know by 11:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing which advocates will appear or argue the case and must mark their appearances accordingly. The notice does not allow the AoR to mark appearances for advocates who are not authorized to appear or argue the case.”
