Unit II — Duties of an Advocate

“An advocate is an officer of the court. His first duty is to the court, not to the client.” — Supreme Court in Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab (1998)

The Six Duties — Overview

flowchart TD
    A[Advocate's Duties under BCI Rules] --> B[I. Duty to Court]
    A --> C[II. Duty to Client]
    A --> D[III. Duty to Opponent]
    A --> E[IV. Duty to Colleagues]
    A --> F[V. Duty to Public & State]
    A --> G[VI. Duty to Self & Profession]
    B --> B1[Dignity, No Private Talk, Proper Dress]
    C --> C1[Accept Brief, Fiduciary Trust, No Misuse]
    D --> D1[Communicate Only Through Opposing Counsel]
    E --> E1[No Advertising, No Poaching Clients]
    F --> F1[Legal Aid, PIL, Public Interest]
    G --> G1[Study, Discipline, Health, Integrity]

BCI Rules — Quick Reference

Money Dealings With Client — Strict NO List

flowchart TD
    Cl[Client Money] --> NoBid[Cannot bid at client's auction]
    Cl --> NoLend[Cannot lend money to client]
    Cl --> NoPerc[No contingency or percentage fee]
    Cl --> NoAdj[Cannot adjust own debt against client money]
    Cl --> AccBook[Must maintain accurate account books - Rule 27]
    Cl --> Return[Must return documents on demand - Rule 32]

Conflict of Interest — When to Refuse a Brief

flowchart TD
    A[Client approaches Advocate] --> B{Conflict of Interest?}
    B -- Yes --> C[Refuse Brief - Rule 11]
    B -- No --> D{Advised the other party before?}
    D -- Yes --> C
    D -- No --> E[Accept Brief]
    E --> F[Continue till Conclusion]
    F -- Cannot withdraw without notice --> G[Rule 12]

Bar-Bench Relationship

The Bar (advocates) and the Bench (judges) are the two wheels of the chariot of justice — both must move in harmony.

Duty of an advocate in a strike: The Supreme Court in Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003) held that lawyers have no right to strike. Attending courts is a professional obligation, not a political right.

✏️ Sample Solved Problem (IRAC Method)

Problem: Advocate Ravi, appearing for the defendant, comes across a document that is highly favourable to the plaintiff. He hides it and does not produce it before the court. Is this professional misconduct? (Frequently asked in KSLU)

I — Issue

Whether suppression of a material document by an advocate amounts to professional misconduct under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961?

R — Rule

• Rule 1 (Duty to Court) — An advocate shall not knowingly make a false statement of law or fact, or suppress material information.
• Rule 19 — An advocate shall not act on the instructions of any person other than his client or his authorised agent.
• Section 35 — Any advocate found guilty of professional misconduct may be punished with reprimand, suspension, or removal.

A — Analysis

Ravi’s act of concealing a document that he knows is material to the case directly violates Rule 1. His primary duty is to the court — not to win at any cost for his client. Suppressing evidence is dishonest conduct that strikes at the foundation of the adversarial system. The fact that he did it to benefit his client is no defence — his duty to the court overrides his duty to his client.

C — Conclusion

Ravi is guilty of professional misconduct under Section 35 of the Advocates Act. The Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council can take action ranging from reprimand to removal from the rolls. He may also be liable for contempt of court.

📄 The full PDF bundle has 6 more solved problems for Unit II — including the lawyer strike problem, withholding documents, misappropriation of client funds, and more. Get the bundle — ₹99