After BCI Chairman’s Remarks On Fake Advocates, Plea Filed In Supreme Court Seeking Nationwide Verification Of Advocates’ Law Degrees

A fresh plea has been filed before the Supreme Court of India seeking nationwide verification of law degrees and enrolment credentials of advocates after recent remarks by the Bar Council of India Chairman claiming that nearly 35-40% advocates possess fake degrees.

The petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by advocate Yogamaya MG, asks for directions to the Union Government, Bar Council of India, State Bar Councils, and the University Grants Commission to create a transparent and uniform verification system for advocates across the country.

The plea states that the issue directly impacts the credibility of the legal profession and public confidence in the justice delivery system. It argues that persons allegedly practising law on forged or unverifiable educational credentials can seriously affect litigants, courts, and institutional trust.

The petitioner relied on recent public statements reportedly made by the BCI leadership regarding fake advocates and incomplete verification processes. According to the plea, the issue is not isolated and has already surfaced in multiple States where fake advocates were allegedly removed from enrolment rolls.

The petition also raises concerns about Bar Council elections, especially in Delhi. It points out that certain candidates and voters whose law degree verification remained pending were allegedly allowed to contest or participate in elections despite earlier directions of the Supreme Court in M. Vardhan v Union of India.

Referring to the Bar Council of Delhi’s voter list, the plea claims that several enrolled advocates still show incomplete or blank verification status on the official website. It argues that if such persons are later found to possess invalid degrees, questions would arise regarding the validity of votes cast by them during Bar Council elections.

The petitioner has further argued that this situation could affect the legitimacy of the entire election process and may even become a ground for countermanding elections in certain situations.

The plea also cites the Supreme Court’s earlier judgment in Ajay Shankar Srivastava v. Bar Council of India, stating that despite judicial directions regarding verification of advocates’ credentials, effective implementation remains lacking.

Importantly, the petition clarifies that the objective is not to target individual advocates but to strengthen transparency, accountability, and confidence in the legal system through a privacy-compliant verification framework.

The matter has been filed through Advocate-on-Record Deepak Prakash and is expected to come up for consideration before the Supreme Court soon.