,

Advocates Act, 1961 | Mains PYQs | LawFoyer

Advocates Act 1961 Mains PYQs | Subjective Questions
LawFoyer
Real attributed examination questions

Advocates Act, 1961: Mains Previous Year Questions (Subjective)

Explore 165 actual subjective question occurrences on the Advocates Act, 1961, Bar Council rules and professional ethics. The topic-wise compilation is drawn from 13 Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record examination years between 2012 and 2025. Each editorially paraphrased question links to a source paper.

Checked · 165 question occurrences · 165 separately displayed prompts · 13 AOR examination years · one exam family

Scope and verification

These are source-supported past descriptive questions, not predictions. Question wording has been paraphrased for brevity and copyright care. Read original papers for the precise wording, complete narrative, options and examination instructions. The 2024 attributed third-party paper is independently identifiable through the Supreme Court official exam archive; other listed years use official PDFs.

Coverage is not nationwide-complete. No State Judicial Services, APO, JLO or UPSC Law Optional question was included without a verified paper. The AOR examination is a distinct national professional written examination. Objective sections are excluded. The incomplete 2024 Paper III Question 10 has been excluded.

This resource contains questions and source metadata only, without model answers or explanations.

Find a question

165 of 165 question occurrences

Legal profession, Bar Councils and enrolment

12 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0094 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

Discuss the development of law firms and how professional ethics apply to them.

2023DiscussionRegulation of law firms10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 5 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0103 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 14

Do advocates enjoy professional privileges? Identify and discuss them.

2023Short answerAdvocates’ privileges5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 14 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0082 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 4 / 1 · Section IV

Summarise restrictions imposed on senior advocates by the Bar Council of India.

2022Short answerSenior advocates5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 4 / 1 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0073 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10

Should admission to legal practice require a character-and-fitness test? Suggest how such a test might be conducted.

2019DiscussionEnrolment and fitness20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 10 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0054 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 11 · Section III

In which circumstances does Section 24A of the Advocates Act disqualify a person from enrolment as an advocate?

2018Short answerDisqualification for enrolment2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 11 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0057 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 14 · Section III

What constitutes moral turpitude for a lawyer in India?

2018Short answerMoral turpitude2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 14 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0129 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Is an independent Bar indispensable to the rule of law? Examine the possible conversion of the profession into a government-regulated public service.

2017DiscussionIndependent legal profession20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 2 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0132 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

What amendments to Bar Council of India Rules would strengthen public trust in the legal profession?

2017DiscussionBar Council rule reform20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 5 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0138 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 11

Section 24A disqualifies certain persons from enrolment for conduct involving moral turpitude. Is the proviso ending disqualification after two years justified, or should it be deleted?

2017DiscussionSection 24A and rehabilitation10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 11 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0140 · 2017 · AOR Paper II, Q. 1

Draft an Article 32 writ petition challenging High Court rules that require an out-of-State advocate to file a joint vakalatnama with a local advocate and obtain registration on a High Court roll. Consider Section 30 (right to practise) and Section 34 of the Advocates Act, 1961, as well as Article 19(1)(g). The affected advocate AB has already complied under protest and seeks to challenge Rules 3 and 3A. (The original paper provides the full rules and detailed factual narrative.)

2017DraftingSection 30 and Section 34 right to practise20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper II, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Editorial paraphrase. Refer to the official source for the full lengthy drafting problem and rule text.

PYQ-0032 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

Explain why an independent legal profession supports the rule of law and protects liberty, referring to constitutional and international rights principles.

2016DiscussionIndependence of the Bar20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0165 · 2013 · AOR Paper I, Q. 3(a)–(b)

Write short notes on (a) Senior Advocate and (b) Advocate-on-Record. These are the two Advocates Act/professional-status subparts of Paper I Question 3, which also included separate questions on criminal and civil procedure.

2013Short notesSenior Advocates and Advocates-on-RecordMarks not verified
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper I, Question 3(a)–(b). Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Relevant subparts only; Paper I Q3 also included unrelated procedural-law subparts.

Professional and other misconduct

23 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0121 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Answer either: (A) define actionable misconduct by a lawyer, identify at least five types and refer to Supreme Court decisions; OR (B) explain advocates’ duties towards the court, clients and opposing party.

2025Alternative questionMisconduct or professional duties10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 4 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0123 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Can a client pursue a lawyer for professional negligence under the Consumer Protection Act? Compare a lawyer’s responsibilities with a doctor’s and examine the relevant judicial decisions.

2025DiscussionProfessional negligence10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 6 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0106 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Distinguish professional misconduct from contempt of court under the relevant legislation and judicial decisions.

2024DiscussionMisconduct versus contempt15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 3 · 15 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0117 · 2024 · AOR Paper I, Q. 11

Section 35 of the Advocates Act distinguishes professional misconduct from other misconduct. Give three instances of each.

2024DiscussionSection 35 instances5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper I, Question 11 · 5 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

This is Paper I Question 11, separate from Paper III Question 11. Seen in the same attributed 2024 examination paper compilation.

PYQ-0090 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

What consequences follow professional or other misconduct by an advocate? Identify the statutory provision and discuss the relevant Supreme Court decisions.

2023DiscussionSection 35 consequences20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0078 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 3 / 4 · Section III

Under Section 35, (a) what amounts to “other misconduct”; and (b) are disciplinary committees’ statutory powers excessively wide or lacking guidelines?

2022Multi-partSection 35 disciplinary discretion10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 3 / 4 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0084 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 4 / 3 · Section IV

What degree of proof is required in Bar Council of India disciplinary proceedings?

2022Short answerStandard of proof5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 4 / 3 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0143 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Distinguish professional misconduct and other misconduct within Section 35(1) of the Advocates Act, referring to decided cases.

2021DiscussionSection 3520 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 2 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0144 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Which sanctions follow professional misconduct? Explain how punishment is chosen and when a person is disqualified from enrolment.

2021DiscussionSanctions and disqualification20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 3 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0147 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Identify major sharp practices and unethical methods in Indian courts. Are existing Bar Council rules adequate for new technologies and evolving fields of practice? Suggest specific changes.

2021DiscussionSharp practices and emerging technology20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 6 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0156 · 2021 · AOR Paper I, Q. 12

What constitutes misconduct or unbecoming conduct of an Advocate-on-Record under the explanation to Order IV Rule 10(a)–(c) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013?

2021Short answerAOR misconduct under court rules2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper I, Question 12 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0067 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Identify unethical practices affecting integrity of Supreme Court legal services. Should Bar Council of India Rules be strengthened?

2019DiscussionRegulatory reform20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 4 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0069 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Critically assess the Advocates Act provisions on professional and other misconduct and propose any necessary legal reforms.

2019DiscussionSection 35 and reform20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 6 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0074 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 11

Write short notes on any two: (a) “reason to believe” under Section 35(1); (b) removal from the AOR register under Order IV Rule 10 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 versus Bar Council discipline; (c) Article 129 contempt versus Section 35 discipline; (d) the decisions in C. Ravichandran Iyer v Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee and Rajiv K. Garg v Shanti Bhushan.

2019Short notesStatutory powers and case law20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 11 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0048 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5 · Section I

How should professional misconduct be defined under the Advocates Act and Bar Council Rules? Should a lawyer’s personal misconduct also attract professional discipline?

2018DiscussionScope of misconduct20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 5 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0056 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 13 · Section III

What punishments can Bar Council disciplinary committees impose for professional misconduct under the Advocates Act?

2018Short answerDisciplinary sanctions2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 13 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0137 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10

How should professional and other misconduct be identified without a definition in the Advocates Act or detailed Section 35 guidelines? Explain the connection between other misconduct and fitness to practise.

2017DiscussionSection 35 and fitness10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 10 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0037 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Explain professional misconduct and other misconduct under Section 35. Can standards used for public servants be applied to advocates?

2016DiscussionSection 35 and other misconduct20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 6 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0038 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Under Section 35, which standard appropriately identifies “other misconduct”: abuse of professional privilege or significant departure from acceptable professional standards? Discuss with cases.

2016DiscussionStandard for other misconduct20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 7 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0040 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

What standard of proof applies to disciplinary proceedings against advocates? Explain “reason to believe” under Section 35.

2016DiscussionStandard of proof10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 9 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0028 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

Explain the meaning of professional misconduct and other misconduct under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

2015DiscussionSection 3510 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 9 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0029 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10

Compare disciplinary powers and appellate procedures involving State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India under the Advocates Act.

2015DiscussionBar Council disciplinary process10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 10 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0015 · 2014 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3(a)–(c)

In a complaint alleging professional or other misconduct: (a) which authority receives the complaint; (b) what procedure must it follow; and (c) which orders can it make?

2014Multi-partDisciplinary authoritiesMarks not verified
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2014, Paper III, Question 3(a)–(c). Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Duties towards courts, clients and opponents

23 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0109 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Describe advocates’ duties and critically assess duties to both court and client under the adversarial system.

2024DiscussionCourt and client15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 6 · 15 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0099 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10

What are an advocate’s duties towards the court?

2023Short answerDuty to court5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 10 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0075 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 3 / 1 · Section III

Discuss the metaphor of opposing advocates and the judge as the wheels and driver of the chariot of justice, in light of an advocate’s statutory duties to courts, clients and colleagues.

2022DiscussionCourt, client and colleagues10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 3 / 1 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0142 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

List the duties advocates owe different persons, including the court’s presiding officer, and explain how to resolve conflicts among these duties.

2021DiscussionConflicting professional duties20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0152 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 11

A client asks a lawyer to secure an adjournment on any possible ground to prolong interim relief and inconvenience the opponent. How should the lawyer respond?

2021Problem questionImproper adjournments10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 11 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0044 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1 · Section I

Discuss how advocates reconcile their primary duty towards courts, duty towards clients, and obligation to remain courteous to opponents.

2018DiscussionMultiple professional duties20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0060 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 17 · Section III

When may an advocate withdraw from a case or return a brief?

2018Short answerWithdrawal from representation2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 17 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0061 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 18 · Section III

Identify the Supreme Court judgment or citation concerning suppression of material facts in advocacy and contempt for abuse of court process.

2018Short answerSuppression of material facts2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 18 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0133 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Discuss courtroom conduct, professional fellowship and collegiality under Bar Council rules and Supreme Court decisions, considering the distinction between advocacy as craft and as calling.

2017DiscussionCourtesy towards colleagues20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 6 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0134 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Do the different duties imposed on lawyers by Bar Council Rules conflict irreconcilably? Assess judicial decisions and comparative legal-profession standards.

2017DiscussionConflicting professional duties20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 7 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0135 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

How can counsel maintain proper courtroom respect and dignity without becoming excessively subservient to judges or compromising an independent Bar? Discuss the two contrasting statements supplied in the question.

2017DiscussionCourtroom decorum and independence20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 8 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0036 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

Discuss the standards of professional competence, legal reasoning and informed advice required of advocates before the Supreme Court.

2016DiscussionCompetence and advice20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 5 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0042 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 11

Explain acting in clients’ best interests consistently with the advocate’s status as an officer of the court.

2016DiscussionCourt and client10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 11 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0020 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

Explain the distinct obligations owed by an advocate to the court, client, profession, opponents, self, public and State under Bar Council of India Rules.

2015DiscussionMultiple professional duties20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0022 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

How should a Supreme Court lawyer harmonise duties owed to the constitutional court with the client’s best interests?

2015DiscussionCourt and client20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 3 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0023 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Explain the duty to give sober, discreet and honest advice to clients even where such advice may mean losing prospective gains.

2015DiscussionLegal advice20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 4 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0024 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

Explain why advocates must avoid unsound arguments, inaccurate pleadings and the concealment of adverse judgments in light of the rule of law.

2015DiscussionCandour and citation20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 5 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0018 · 2014 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

How should advocates reconcile their position as officers of the court with the obligation to serve clients’ best interests?

2014DiscussionCourt and clientMarks not verified
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2014, Paper III, Question 5. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0157 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

A widely reported sexual-assault case in Delhi attracts public demonstrations and intensive press coverage. Public Prosecutor Mr X gives press interviews, describing the investigation, day-to-day trial and his assessment of evidence. Discuss: (a) whether this constitutes trial by media and measures needed for a free and fair trial; (b) the propriety of the prosecutor openly commenting on the pending case; and (c) whether a defence advocate may decline a brief solely because the advocate believes an accused is guilty.

2013Multi-part problemPublic prosecutors, trial publicity and defence briefs15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 1 · 15 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0001 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

How can a Supreme Court lawyer reconcile the primary duty to the court with acting in the client’s best interests?

2012DiscussionCourt and client12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 1 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0002 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Discuss whether a lawyer making a concession while arguing needs express authorisation from the client.

2012DiscussionInstructions and concessions12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 2 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0006 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Discuss an advocate’s duty to state a client’s case fairly and candidly without disrespecting the court.

2012DiscussionCandour and courtesy12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 6 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0010 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10

Must a Supreme Court lawyer disclose a directly relevant adverse precedent overlooked by opposing counsel, even when it damages the client’s case?

2012DiscussionDuty to cite adverse authority12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 10 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Fees, client property and financial interests

10 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0119 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

An advocate personally owns land under acquisition and is asked to represent other owners. Assess five fee arrangements: (A) free representation; (B) free representation in exchange for referrals to paying clients; (C) half upfront and half on successful compensation; (D) full fee plus a compensation-linked bonus; (E) no upfront fee but a 50% compensation share. Reassess all five if clients are road-accident victims’ dependants. Explain recovery steps if agreed fees go unpaid.

2025Problem questionConflicts and alternative fee arrangements10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 2 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0113 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 11

May an advocate charge a percentage-based or success-dependent fee where the client cannot pay fees upfront?

2024DiscussionContingent fees5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 11 · 5 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0100 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 11

May an advocate stand surety for a client or represent a matter in which the advocate has a financial interest?

2023Short answerSurety and pecuniary interest5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 11 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0081 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 3 / 7 · Section III

An advocate refuses to return an original will entrusted by an executor or beneficiary because legal fees remain unpaid. Is this professional misconduct?

2022Problem questionLien over original will10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 3 / 7 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0083 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 4 / 2 · Section IV

An AOR deposits a client’s advance for senior counsel fees in a fixed deposit because the case is unlikely to be listed soon. May the AOR retain the interest?

2022Problem questionInterest on client funds5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 4 / 2 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0051 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8 · Section II

May a lawyer set off money received for a client against reasonable unpaid fees? Could that amount to misconduct, and what alternatives exist to recover fees?

2018Problem questionClient monies10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 8 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0058 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 15 · Section III

What maximum AOR fee on brief for review petitions is prescribed under Part I of the Second Schedule to the Supreme Court Rules?

2018Short answerAOR fees under court rules2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 15 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0027 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

After considering R.D. Saxena v Balram Prasad Sharma, discuss: (a) whether a client’s litigation papers are “goods”; (b) whether their entrustment to an advocate amounts to bailment under Section 148 of the Contract Act; and (c) whether Section 171 permits a lawyer’s lien for unpaid fees.

2015Case-basedLien and recovery of fees20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 8 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0014 · 2014 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Does an advocate have a lien over litigation papers entrusted by a client for payment of unpaid fees? Discuss.

2014DiscussionLien and client papersMarks not verified
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2014, Paper III, Question 2. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0161 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

In light of R.D. Saxena v Balram Prasad Sharma (2000) 7 SCC 264, discuss: (a) whether an advocate may claim a lien on unpaid client case papers under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872; (b) whether client case papers qualify as goods; and (c) whether entrusting case papers to a lawyer creates bailment under Section 148 of that Act.

2013Multi-part discussionClient papers and contractual lien10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 5 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Advertising, solicitation and public statements

16 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0118 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

An AOR proposes to build a professional website. Assess whether it may include: (A) personal qualifications and residential/office contact; (B) associates’ details; (C) degrees, awards and Bar/public offices; (D) prominent clients; (E) books, articles and speech links; (F) a comparative success rate; and (G) Supreme Court, courtroom, office and judge-interaction photographs. Give reasons for each.

2025Multi-partProfessional website content10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 1 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0120 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

After filing an SLP for a former Chief Minister accused of corruption, consider whether the advocate may: (A) publicise pleadings; (B) answer media questions before the hearing; (C) join discussion after a favourable verdict; (D) comment after an adverse verdict criticised publicly; and (E) publish an article confined to legal issues before, during and after hearing. Explain media duties in sensational and ordinary cases.

2025Problem questionPolitically sensitive litigation and media10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 3 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0104 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

Discuss what advocates and law firms may or may not display on professional websites under the Advocates Act and Bar Council rules. Are enforcement rules sufficient, and what reforms are needed?

2024DiscussionWebsites and compliance15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 1 · 15 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0107 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Assess whether lawyers’ participation in televised or other media debates concerning their own sub judice matters violates professional ethics or can amount to contempt.

2024DiscussionMedia participation15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 4 · 15 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0110 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Define a “tout”, discuss Indian law on touting and examine the Supreme Court Registry’s role under the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

2024DiscussionTouting5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 7 · 5 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0095 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

What is the scope of fair criticism of judgments by advocates, and what responsibilities arise for media reporting on sub judice matters?

2023DiscussionFair criticism and media10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 6 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0097 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Explain the rationale for prohibiting lawyer advertising and solicitation, citing decisions and examining whether the prohibition remains relevant on social media.

2023DiscussionAdvertising on social media10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 8 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0079 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 3 / 5 · Section III

An AOR sends an opposing litigant an unsolicited postcard offering services and referring to the Supreme Court Rules. Does this amount to professional misconduct requiring disciplinary action?

2022Problem questionDirect solicitation and AOR10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 3 / 5 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0086 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 4 / 5 · Section IV

What permissible methods may advocates use for professional self-promotion without contravening Section 49(1)(c) and restrictions on advertising?

2022DiscussionPermissible promotion5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 4 / 5 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0148 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Explain the rules on advertising and solicitation, evaluate their justification and suggest reforms considering widespread use of social media.

2021DiscussionAdvertising and social media20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 7 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0064 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

Discuss the constitutional and ethical implications of an advocate commenting publicly on matters pending before courts, including freedom of speech and the sub judice principle.

2019DiscussionSub judice and expression20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0046 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3 · Section I

(a) Explain rules restricting advertising and solicitation, including whether they are excessive or unconstitutional. (b) Can a lawyer maintain a website, and what information may it contain?

2018Multi-partAdvertising and websites20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 3 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0047 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4 · Section I

(a) May counsel in a pending case join media discussions, and does the answer change after a lower court or Supreme Court decision? (b) Compare safeguards for public debate of criminal cases, tax disputes, writs and civil proceedings.

2018Multi-partMedia and sub judice cases20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 4 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0016 · 2014 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3 (second printed item)

May an advocate maintain a professional website? What information can lawfully appear on that website?

2014DiscussionWebsitesMarks not verified
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2014, Paper III, Question 3 (second printed item). Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

The original paper repeats printed question number 3.

PYQ-0158 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

An Advocate-on-Record who won a law-school gold medal and placed highly in the AOR examination but receives few briefs emails the law departments of several State Governments seeking appointment as Supreme Court Standing Counsel. The emails emphasise his qualifications and attach a résumé. Does this amount to professional misconduct warranting disciplinary proceedings, and would a finding of guilt be justified? Discuss with reference to case law.

2013Problem questionDirect solicitation of government briefs15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 2 · 15 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0005 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

Discuss why lawyers cannot solicit clients in the same manner businesses solicit customers.

2012DiscussionSolicitation12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 5 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Confidentiality, legal privilege and conflicts

10 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0122 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

While handling a criminal appeal, a client admits committing the offence. What obligations arise for the AOR towards the client and court, including legal privilege and the “hired gun” conception of advocacy?

2025Problem questionClient confession and legal privilege10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 5 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0108 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

Explain the scope and exceptions of advocate-client legal privilege, including whether confidentiality survives the termination of the lawyer-client relationship.

2024DiscussionContinuing confidentiality15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 5 · 15 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0102 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 13

Explain the prohibition against breaching obligations under Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act in advocate-client communications.

2023Short answerSection 126 Evidence Act5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 13 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0070 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Analyse ethical risks concerning lawyers’ use of social media and privileged data. Should special professional regulations govern this activity?

2019DiscussionSocial media and confidentiality20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 7 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0049 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6 · Section I

(a) Can legal professional privilege resist law-enforcement search and seizure at a law office? (b) May former associates or colleagues retain client opinions or client contacts, and does partnership status change the answer?

2018Multi-partProfessional communications and data20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 6 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0059 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 16 · Section III

In which exceptional circumstances may an advocate represent an organisation of which the advocate is a member?

2018Short answerInstitutional conflicts2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 16 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0136 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

Does an advocate’s duty of confidence towards a client survive termination of the engagement? Discuss decided cases and rules.

2017DiscussionContinuing confidence10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 9 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0017 · 2014 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Discuss why Bar Council rules restrict advocates from representing organisations or institutions whose executive committees they belong to.

2014DiscussionInstitutional conflictsMarks not verified
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2014, Paper III, Question 4. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0159 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Mr Y prosecutes a complaint under Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that others enticed away his wife, Mrs Y. During the case, Mrs Y petitions for divorce. Mr Z, her advocate in divorce proceedings, admits that Mrs Y attended a conference with another person but refuses to identify that person, citing Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. A Magistrate rejects the privilege objection; a revision follows. Discuss: (a) whether Section 126 protects only oral client communications; (b) whether the identity of an accompanying person observed during consultation is confidential; and (c) whether the legal position changes when Mrs Y herself testifies and invokes Section 126.

2013Multi-part problemClient communications and identity of third person15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 3 · 15 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0007 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Discuss the rule that lawyers should not accept briefs where they know the assigned judge is one before whom they ought not appear.

2012DiscussionConflict of interest12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 7 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Strikes, contempt and disciplinary jurisdiction

14 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0126 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

Should lawyers strike in response to demands for a High Court bench, crimes against lawyers inside court premises or judicial vacancies? Discuss alternatives that avoid harming litigants.

2025DiscussionStrikes and alternatives10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 9 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0105 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Examine the prohibition on advocates’ strikes under Article 19, any exceptions, penalties, Supreme Court decisions, and lawful alternatives available to an aggrieved Bar.

2024DiscussionStrikes and remedies15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 2 · 15 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0091 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Trace Supreme Court rulings on lawyers’ strikes, boycotts and abstention from court. Do such actions constitute contempt?

2023DiscussionStrike jurisprudence20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 2 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0096 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Can a High Court prohibit an advocate from practising before itself and subordinate courts? If so, identify the jurisdiction and its limits.

2023DiscussionHigh Court practice restrictions10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 7 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0077 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 3 / 3 · Section III

Can a High Court exercise contempt jurisdiction concurrently with disciplinary proceedings of the Bar Council against an advocate? Discuss with cases.

2022DiscussionContempt and Bar Council powers10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 3 / 3 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0087 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 4 / 6 · Section IV

When may an advocate criticise the judiciary in court or publicly, and when does criticism become contempt? Discuss C. Ravichandran Iyer v Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee.

2022DiscussionCriticism and contempt5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 4 / 6 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0088 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 4 / 7 · Section IV

Assess the legality of advocate strikes concerning demands for a High Court bench, judicial vacancies, transfer of judges or judicial promotions, with reference to relevant case law.

2022DiscussionCollective boycotts5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 4 / 7 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0145 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Is an advocate’s strike ethically or legally permissible? Discuss decided cases and the limits of protest.

2021DiscussionStrike jurisprudence20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 4 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0050 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7 · Section II

May an advocate criticise the judiciary inside or outside court, and when could such criticism constitute contempt? Discuss C. Ravichandran Iyer v Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee.

2018DiscussionFair criticism and contempt10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 7 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0052 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9 · Section II

Assess whether a hunger strike by advocates seeking High Court judicial appointments violates the law against lawyers’ strikes, referring to Krishnakant Tamrakar.

2018Problem questionStrike and protest10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 9 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0033 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Can strikes by advocates be justified on legal or ethical grounds? Discuss whether they constitute contempt of court or other misconduct.

2016DiscussionLawyers’ strikes20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 2 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0039 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Distinguish the Supreme Court’s power to withdraw AOR privileges under the Supreme Court Rules from professional suspension or licence revocation by Bar Councils. Examine Articles 129 and 142 and Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India.

2016Case-basedContempt and AOR privileges20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 8 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0160 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Using Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409, discuss the difference between barring a contemner advocate from appearance before a court and suspending the licence to practise. Address: (a) the Supreme Court’s powers as a court of record under Article 129; (b) Article 142, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and its Section 38 appellate provision as stated in the question; and (c) whether the Supreme Court’s power to withdraw Advocate-on-Record privileges under Order IV Rule 8A of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 is governed by Chapter V of the Advocates Act, 1961.

2013Multi-part discussionContempt, licensing and AOR privileges15 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 4 · 15 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0163 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

With reference to Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45 and its observations on rare, one-day protest abstentions, discuss whether advocates’ strikes are ethical and the rights and duties of lawyers who seek to protest actions perceived as harmful to public interest.

2013DiscussionBoycotts and work stoppages10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 7 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Advocate-on-Record and court practice

12 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0125 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Answer either: (A) discuss ethical duties during virtual court hearings; OR (B) evaluate the ethical obligations of an AOR asked to urgently e-file an SLP for an elderly father with Alzheimer’s disease, including electronic authorisation, instructions, and a proposed settlement.

2025Alternative questionVirtual hearings and vulnerable clients10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 8 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0111 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Explain special duties owed by Advocates-on-Record under applicable rules and decided cases.

2024DiscussionSpecial AOR duties5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 8 · 5 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0085 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 4 / 4 · Section IV

A client insists upon an SLP against an ad interim High Court order, although the AOR believes Article 136 is not attracted and the matter is pending in the High Court. Must the AOR file it?

2022Problem questionEthical duties in filing SLP5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 4 / 4 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0149 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Discuss the special obligations of a Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record and evaluate whether the AOR system remains necessary under applicable rules and judgments.

2021DiscussionNeed for the AOR system20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 8 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0154 · 2021 · AOR Paper I, Q. 10

When a vakalatnama is executed before an Advocate-on-Record, what certification is necessary? How do duties differ when the document has already been executed before a notary or another advocate?

2021Short answerVakalatnama certification2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper I, Question 10 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0155 · 2021 · AOR Paper I, Q. 11

Which two essential books of account must an Advocate-on-Record maintain under Order IV Rule 7(d)(i)–(ii) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013?

2021Short answerAOR accounts2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper I, Question 11 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0062 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 19 · Section III

Identify the legal proposition decided in Rameshwar Prasad Goyal (2014) 1 SCC 572.

2018Short answerAdvocate-on-Record case law2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 19 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0141 · 2017 · AOR Paper I, Q. 11

When a client wishes to seek review of a Supreme Court judgment, under which circumstances should the AOR agree to file the review petition?

2017Short answerEthical review filing8 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper I, Question 11 · 8 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0013 · 2014 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

When was AOR Paper III renamed from Elementary Knowledge of Book Keeping and Accounts and Professional Ethics to Advocacy and Professional Ethics, and why was it changed?

2014DiscussionProfessional ethics examinationMarks not verified
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2014, Paper III, Question 1. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0162 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

The Supreme Court criticised Advocates-on-Record who merely lend their names for filing special leave petitions without examining the case, preparing pleadings, appearing when listed, or curing defects, in Vijay Dhanji Chaudhary v Suhas Jayant Natawadkar (2010) 1 SCC 166. Discuss how the dignity and substantive responsibility of the AOR institution can be preserved and whether reforms in the governing rules, practice and procedure are required.

2013DiscussionName-lending and AOR accountability10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 6 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0008 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Discuss whether an Advocate-on-Record should refuse to file a petition considered unfit for Supreme Court consideration.

2012DiscussionFiling responsibility12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 8 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0012 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 12

Discuss whether Advocates-on-Record bear a higher duty to the Supreme Court because of the nature of that institution.

2012DiscussionSpecial duties of AOR12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 12 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Mediation and alternative dispute resolution

7 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0127 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10

Discuss ethical issues arising for a lawyer in mediation, including whether an additional fee may be linked to successful settlement.

2025DiscussionMediation fees and ethics10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 10 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0115 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 13

What professional ethical standards apply to advocates engaged in mediation and conciliation?

2024DiscussionMediation conduct5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 13 · 5 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0080 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 3 / 6 · Section III

Explain mediation’s relevance and the role of advocates in promoting mediation.

2022DiscussionMediation by advocates10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 3 / 6 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0150 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

How far must lawyers promote conciliation and mediation, and how is this duty linked to professional ethics?

2021DiscussionConciliation and mediation10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 9 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0139 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 12

Examine the developing responsibility of lawyers to promote mediation as a preferable means of resolving disputes.

2017DiscussionPromotion of mediation10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 12 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0041 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10

What duties does the Bar have in promoting alternative dispute resolution, and how do these relate to professional ethics?

2016DiscussionAlternative dispute resolution10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 10 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0031 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 12

Discuss the role of lawyers in encouraging mediation as a means of resolving disputes.

2015DiscussionPromoting mediation10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 12 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Ethical foundations, advocacy and reform

25 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue

PYQ-0124 · 2025 · AOR Paper III, Q. 7

Explain why effective advocacy requires knowing when not to argue. Identify at least seven features of bad advocacy.

2025DiscussionAdvocacy standards10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2025, Paper III, Question 7 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0116 · 2024 · AOR Paper III, Q. 14

What are Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy, and which is most relevant to present-day Indian practice?

2024DiscussionSeven Lamps of Advocacy5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 14 · 5 marks. Read attributed question paper reproduction.
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0092 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Discuss Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy and their contemporary relevance.

2023DiscussionSeven Lamps of Advocacy10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 3 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0098 · 2023 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

Is the description of an advocate as a “hired gun” appropriate in light of duties to clients?

2023DiscussionHired-gun advocacy5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 9 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0076 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 3 / 2 · Section III

Discuss whether innovation and activism within legal boundaries are central to jurisprudential development, with reference to judgments.

2022DiscussionLawyer and legal development10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 3 / 2 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0089 · 2022 · AOR Paper III, Q. Section 5 / 1 · Section V

Select and discuss any two qualities among Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy, and identify any other qualities that should guide advocates.

2022EssaySeven Lamps of Advocacy20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2022, Paper III, Question Section 5 / 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0146 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 5

Discuss the profession’s role in preserving public trust in justice and propose appropriate reforms to Bar Council of India Rules.

2021DiscussionBar and public trust20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 5 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0153 · 2021 · AOR Paper III, Q. 12

What are Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy, which is most significant, and are these qualities relevant to contemporary Indian practice?

2021DiscussionSeven Lamps of Advocacy10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, Paper III, Question 12 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0065 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Distinguish morals from professional ethics, and examine the relevance of a lawyer’s character to ethical conduct.

2019DiscussionMorality and ethics20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 2 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0066 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Does adversarial litigation turn lawyers into “hired guns” or mouthpieces for their clients? Examine conflicts of values with illustrations.

2019DiscussionAdversarial ethics20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 3 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0071 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Can lawyers’ pursuit of private livelihood be reconciled with the duty to serve the public good? Discuss with reference to Adam Smith’s self-interest argument.

2019DiscussionLawyers and public good20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 8 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0072 · 2019 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

Is legal ethics necessarily a compromise between competing responsibilities to courts, clients, society and the lawyer’s family livelihood?

2019DiscussionCompeting obligations20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, Paper III, Question 9 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0053 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 10 · Section II

Discuss the legal and ethical issues arising where a high-profile politician’s personal lawyer pays personal “hush money” to silence an alleged intimate partner.

2018Problem questionProfessional integrity10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 10 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0063 · 2018 · AOR Paper III, Q. 20 · Section III

Name the Seven Lamps of Advocacy described by Justice Abbot Parry.

2018Short answerSeven Lamps of Advocacy2 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 20 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0128 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 1

Compare the roles of the legal profession and the judiciary in maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice.

2017DiscussionProfessional public trust20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 1 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0130 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Critique the conventional lawyer-role principles of neutrality, partisanship and non-accountability. Suggest alternatives when unpopular clients, moral disagreements, environmental issues or equality claims arise.

2017DiscussionNeutrality and partisanship20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 3 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0131 · 2017 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Does adversarial advocacy inevitably turn lawyers into “hired guns” lacking independent ethical judgment? Assess Lord Brougham’s statement in the Trial of Queen Caroline.

2017DiscussionHired-gun role20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2017, Paper III, Question 4 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0034 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Distinguish professional values from professional virtues and explain the relevance of each to professional ethics.

2016DiscussionValues and virtues20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 3 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0035 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 4

Examine Henry Brougham’s assertion of exclusive loyalty to the client, the “hired gun” conception of advocacy, the adversarial system and Bar Council rules.

2016DiscussionHired-gun advocacy20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 4 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0043 · 2016 · AOR Paper III, Q. 12

Do corporate lawyers owe public responsibilities comparable with those of advocates engaged in court proceedings? Discuss.

2016DiscussionCorporate lawyering10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2016, Paper III, Question 12 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0021 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 2

Is professional conduct distinct from professional ethics? Examine the relationship between ethics, morality and character.

2015DiscussionProfessional ethics and morals20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 2 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0025 · 2015 · AOR Paper III, Q. 6

Critically examine Karl Llewellyn’s observations concerning legal indeterminacy, litigation tactics and the ethics of advocacy.

2015DiscussionAdversarial ethics20 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, Paper III, Question 6 · 20 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0164 · 2013 · AOR Paper III, Q. 8

Write short notes on any two: (a) champerty and maintenance, including whether an advocate participating in such arrangements commits misconduct under Chapter V of the Advocates Act, 1961 and Bar Council of India Rules; (b) whether the role of amicus curiae differs from voluntary pro bono representation; (c) restrictions on solicitation and advertising, including whether an advocate may maintain a website and what information it may contain.

2013Short notesChamperty, amicus curiae and websites10 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2013, Paper III, Question 8 · 10 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0003 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 3

Discuss how declining values and standards within the legal profession affect public perception of courts.

2012DiscussionProfessional standards12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 3 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
PYQ-0009 · 2012 · AOR Paper III, Q. 9

Discuss whether brevity in petitions and oral submissions makes advocacy more effective than lengthy presentation.

2012DiscussionAdvocacy skills12.5 marks
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 9 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).

Source papers and coverage audit

  1. 2025: 10 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  2. 2024: 14 prompts. Attributed reproduction (B · attributed reproduction, sitting listed on SCI archive).
  3. 2023: 14 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  4. 2022: 15 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  5. 2021: 15 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  6. 2019: 11 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  7. 2018: 20 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  8. 2017: 14 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  9. 2016: 12 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  10. 2015: 12 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  11. 2014: 7 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  12. 2013: 9 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
  13. 2012: 12 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).

Supreme Court AOR examination archives, master official index.

Verified coverage

165 question occurrences and 165 separately entered prompts across 13 AOR exam years, one examination family. 12 year-specific sources are official Supreme Court PDFs; the 2024 collection is an attributed secondary reproduction. Each occurrence has its own numbered card, question-paper reference and source link.

Outstanding gaps

This is not comprehensive nationwide judiciary mains coverage. Earlier AOR archive years 2007–2011 remain unreviewed, and remaining AOR Paper I, II and IV sources were not exhaustively reviewed. State/UT Civil Judge and Higher Judicial Service mains, prosecutorial examinations, legal-officer recruitments, UPSC descriptive papers and regional-language archives were not exhaustively audited. The available reproduction omitted complete wording of 2024 Paper III Q10, which is not included. Original paper page numbers were not consistently verified and are not asserted.

Evidence standards

A: Supreme Court hosted examination paper. B: credible attributed third-party reproduction, with Supreme Court exam archive confirming the year and Paper III session. All question texts are faithful editorial paraphrases rather than verbatim originals.

LawFoyer · Advocates Act, 1961 · Mains Subjective PYQs · lawfoyer.in
Share this :
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp
Picture of Prakhar Singh
Prakhar Singh