THE BEYOND OBITER LAW BLOG: Law & Policy
1 min read
The Supreme Court has underscored the need for a dedicated financial support mechanism for young advocates, observing that economic difficulties during the early years of practice are driving many talented lawyers away from the profession. The Court suggested the creation of a Young Lawyers’ Professional Assistance Fund to provide structured support to junior members of the Bar.
The observations were made by a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana while hearing a plea concerning the challenges faced by young advocates and women lawyers. The Court issued notice to the Union Government, all States and Union Territories, seeking their responses.
Recognising the realities faced by young practitioners, particularly first-generation lawyers, the Bench noted that many begin their careers without established professional networks, office infrastructure, stable clientele, or adequate financial backing. As a result, sustaining a litigation practice often becomes difficult during the formative years.
Expressing concern over the consequences of this situation, the Court observed:
“It is this period of turmoil that often compels capable and promising young lawyers to abandon practice at the Bar altogether. We apprehend that such attrition may produce a form of professional brain drain, diminishing the ability of the Bar to attract and retain the young and meritorious.”
To address these concerns, the Bench proposed the establishment of a dedicated assistance fund under the supervision of the jurisdictional High Courts or an autonomous body constituted in consultation with the Union and State Governments. The Court stated:
“It thus seems to us that a Young Lawyers’ Professional Assistance Fund must be created and should be established under the exclusive control of the jurisdictional High Courts or an autonomous body constituted by the Union of India in consultation with the State Governments.”
The Court suggested that the fund could be financed through voluntary contributions from senior advocates and experienced practitioners, a share of court fees collected by the judiciary, and a portion of costs imposed in judicial proceedings. It also indicated that legislative measures providing incentives such as tax exemptions and public recognition could encourage contributions.
The Bench further proposed that the fund be used to provide a monthly stipend or honorarium to first-generation lawyers and advocates from economically or socially disadvantaged backgrounds during the initial years of their practice. According to the Court:
“The proposed fund must be utilised to provide a reasonable monthly stipend-cum-honorarium to such young advocates, who are first-generation lawyers or those from economically and socially disadvantaged backgrounds, during the formative years of their professional careers.”
The Court also suggested exploring a sustainable model under which lawyers who benefited from the scheme could contribute back to the fund once they become professionally established.
Clarifying that these observations were only preliminary in nature, the Bench stated that they were intended to facilitate a broader discussion among stakeholders on strengthening institutional support for young advocates.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on July 17, with the Court requesting assistance from the Attorney General, State Advocate Generals, and Standing Counsel for Union Territories.