JOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN advocate as defined in S. 2 (1) (a) of the Advocates Act 25 of 1961 (the Act), has to conform to regulations in the matter of robes. S. 34 of the Act enables the High Court to make rules laying down the conditions subject to which an advocate shall be permitted to practise in the High Court and in the courts subordinate thereto. Power is also conferred by S. 49 (1) (gg)on the Bar Council of India to make rules prescribing the form of dresses or robes to be worn by an advocate appearing before any court, or tribunal.

(2.) THE High Court of Kerala has, in exercise of the powers vested in it under S. 34, framed rules dated July 10,1969 laying down the conditions subject to which an advocate shall be permitted to practise in the High Court of kerala, and in the courts subordinate thereto. Rule 12of these rules prescribes the dress to be worn by an advocate, and runs as under: "12. Advocates appearing in Court shall wear the following dress. (1) Advocates other than lady advocates:- (a) Black buttoned-up coat (chapkan, achkan or sherwani), barrister's or Bachelor of Laws' gown, and bands, or (b) Black open collar coat, white shirt, white collar, stiff or soft, with Barrister's or Bachelor of Laws gown and bands. (2) Lady Advocates:- Regional dress of subdued colour with Barrister's or bachelor of laws' gown, white collar, stiff or soft, and bands. " Some doubt was expressed at the hearing of the case as to whether this rule could apply to advocates appearing in criminal courts, as the rules of which it forms part appear as Appendix III to the Kerala Civil Rules of Practice. I do not however find any room for doubt as the rule does not make any distinction between civil and criminal courts, and therefore, the dress regulations prescribed by this court must apply equally for appearance before the civil and the criminal courts.

(3.) EVEN at the outset, it has to be stated that the original petition, so far as the petitioner is concerned, has become irrelevant, and does not require any decision at this distance of time. But I am dealing with the matter in view of its general importance, and the need for clarification. In view of its importance to the profession, this court had earlier issued notice to the Bar Council of Kerala, the Kerala Chapter of indian Women Lawyers' Federation, the Kerala Lawyers' Association and the kerala High Court Advocates 'association, pursuant to which Mr. M. M. Abdul azeez, Chairman of the Kerala Bar Council appeared and elucidated the position. I express my appreciation of the ready response of the Bar Council to the notice of this Court, on a matter touching the profession, and the assistance rendered by Mr. Abdul Azeez.