Court emphasizes strict adherence to Advocates Act, 1961, and upholds FIR against Surendra Singh for unauthorized practice of law
In a significant judgment delivered on August 25, 2026, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the petition filed by Surendra Singh, who was accused of representing himself as an advocate without being duly enrolled under the Advocates Act, 1961. The petition sought to quash the FIR No.180/2025 registered at Police Station Makrana, District Didwana-Kuchaman, under Section 319(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
The bench, presided over by Justice Mr. Ravi Chirania, observed that Surendra Singh had appeared before the trial courts in multiple cases, filing various legal documents while falsely representing himself as an advocate. The court noted that this conduct was impermissible under the Advocates Act, 1961, which mandates that only those persons duly enrolled with the respective State Bar Council can practice law or represent themselves as advocates.
During the hearing, the petitioner initially denied the allegations, claiming he had never presented himself as an advocate or performed functions reserved exclusively for advocates. However, after detailed arguments and intervention by Senior Advocate Mr. Anand Purohit—a former President of the Bar Association who assisted the court in ascertaining facts—the petitioner sought to withdraw his petition. The court refused this withdrawal, interpreting the petitioner’s conduct as further affirmation of the charges.
The court also highlighted an incident where the petitioner evaded apprehension by scaling the court premises' wall, underscoring the seriousness of the offense. Emphasizing the importance of maintaining the integrity of the legal profession, the court dismissed the petition and imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000, directing the petitioner to deposit the amount within one month to the Rajasthan High Court Advocate Clerks Association.
This judgment reinforces the legal framework under the Advocates Act, 1961, and the BNSS, 2023, against unauthorized legal practice, safeguarding the public from unqualified representation and maintaining professional standards within the judiciary.
Bottom Line:
No person can be permitted to practise as an Advocate or represent himself as an Advocate unless duly enrolled with the respective Bar Council of State under the Advocates Act, 1961. Misrepresentation as an Advocate without proper enrollment is a serious offense.
Statutory provision(s):
Section 319(2) BNSS, 2023, Section 528 BNSS, 2023, Advocates Act, 1961
Surendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2975822
