Advocates Cannot Seek Financial Assistance from Bar Council as a Matter of Right
Haryana High Court Clarifies Scope of Section 6 of the Advocates Act, 1961
In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a petition filed by Ravneet Kaur, an unestablished advocate, seeking financial aid from the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Rohit Kapoor, delivered its verdict on July 1, 2025, emphasizing the discretionary nature of Section 6 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
The petitioner, representing herself, had approached the court for reimbursement of various expenses including medical bills, house rent allowance, personal security services, and travel expenses. She argued that Section 6 of the Advocates Act not only allows but mandates the Bar Council to provide financial support to advocates who are poor or unestablished.
However, the court clarified that while Section 6 does enable the Bar Council to offer financial aid, it does not establish a legal or vested right for advocates to claim such benefits. Justice Kshetarpal noted that the issuance of a writ of mandamus requires a clear legal right, which the petitioner failed to establish in her case.
The judgment underscores that the provision for financial aid is purely discretionary and intended to empower the Bar Council to support advocates in need, rather than obligating it to provide specific financial assistance. Consequently, the court declined to entertain the petition, reinforcing the interpretation that Section 6 is an enabling provision without conferring enforceable rights.
This decision highlights the limitations of the Advocates Act in mandating financial support and serves as a reminder of the discretionary powers held by the Bar Council in administering aid to advocates. The ruling also reiterates the judiciary's role in interpreting statutory provisions in accordance with legislative intent, especially in matters concerning financial aid and welfare measures.
