NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by an overseas Indian seeking to be treated at par with non-resident Indians for the purpose of practicing law and getting membership of the State Bar Council, saying he did not have time for “fancy litigation”.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalia Bagchi ruled that OCI status, while providing certain privileges, does not equate to Indian citizenship which remains a mandatory condition for registration under Section 24 of the Advocates Act.
“We have no time to litigate on welfare,” the CJI said while refusing to accept the petition filed by OCI card holder Chelabhai Karsanbhai Patel.
Patil approached the Supreme Court seeking eligibility to become a member of the State Bar Council.
His counsel argued that notifications issued by the Home Ministry in 2009 and 2021 effectively put OCIs on par with NRIs.
“The 2009 MHA Notification, supplemented by the 2021 Notification, puts me on par with NRIs. NRIs are largely Indian citizens,” the lawyer said, urging the bench to interpret the language of the notification expansively.
But the court was not inclined to accept this explanation.
Judge Bagchi explained that the equivalence mentioned in the Ministry of Home Affairs notifications is limited to specific “permissible areas” and does not extend to the basic status of citizenship required for legal practice.
“These notices must be read in context,” Justice Bagchi noted.
“There is a three-tier situation. You have a higher status than a foreign national with an LLB degree, but none of this makes you an Indian citizen or a non-Indian citizen, which qualifies you to be a member of the Bar Council of India,” the judge said.
When the petitioner’s counsel argued that Section 7B of the Citizenship Act does not expressly exclude the right to practice law, the bench emphasized that capacity is a matter of strict statutory text and not the absence of a “negative covenant”.
Registration as a lawyer is subject to Section 24 of the Advocates Act, which mandates Indian citizenship and is subject to specific exceptions to reciprocity for foreign nationals, the jury said.
Section 24 deals with persons who may be admitted as advocates on the State List.
“Subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, a person shall be eligible for admission as an advocate in the State Roll, if he satisfies the following conditions, namely: He is a citizen of India: Provided that, subject to the other provisions of this Act, a citizen of any other country may be admitted as an advocate in the State Roll, if citizens of India, who are duly qualified, are admitted to practice law in that other country,” the clause said.
This article was generated from an automated news feed without any modifications to the text.
