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.
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
Discuss the development of law firms and how professional ethics apply to them.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Do advocates enjoy professional privileges? Identify and discuss them.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Summarise restrictions imposed on senior advocates by the Bar Council of India.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Should admission to legal practice require a character-and-fitness test? Suggest how such a test might be conducted.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
In which circumstances does Section 24A of the Advocates Act disqualify a person from enrolment as an advocate?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What constitutes moral turpitude for a lawyer in India?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Is an independent Bar indispensable to the rule of law? Examine the possible conversion of the profession into a government-regulated public service.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What amendments to Bar Council of India Rules would strengthen public trust in the legal profession?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.)
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).
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.
Explain why an independent legal profession supports the rule of law and protects liberty, referring to constitutional and international rights principles.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
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
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Distinguish professional misconduct from contempt of court under the relevant legislation and judicial decisions.
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Section 35 of the Advocates Act distinguishes professional misconduct from other misconduct. Give three instances of each.
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).
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.
What consequences follow professional or other misconduct by an advocate? Identify the statutory provision and discuss the relevant Supreme Court decisions.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Under Section 35, (a) what amounts to “other misconduct”; and (b) are disciplinary committees’ statutory powers excessively wide or lacking guidelines?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What degree of proof is required in Bar Council of India disciplinary proceedings?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Distinguish professional misconduct and other misconduct within Section 35(1) of the Advocates Act, referring to decided cases.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Which sanctions follow professional misconduct? Explain how punishment is chosen and when a person is disqualified from enrolment.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Identify unethical practices affecting integrity of Supreme Court legal services. Should Bar Council of India Rules be strengthened?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Critically assess the Advocates Act provisions on professional and other misconduct and propose any necessary legal reforms.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
How should professional misconduct be defined under the Advocates Act and Bar Council Rules? Should a lawyer’s personal misconduct also attract professional discipline?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What punishments can Bar Council disciplinary committees impose for professional misconduct under the Advocates Act?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain professional misconduct and other misconduct under Section 35. Can standards used for public servants be applied to advocates?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Under Section 35, which standard appropriately identifies “other misconduct”: abuse of professional privilege or significant departure from acceptable professional standards? Discuss with cases.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What standard of proof applies to disciplinary proceedings against advocates? Explain “reason to believe” under Section 35.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain the meaning of professional misconduct and other misconduct under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Compare disciplinary powers and appellate procedures involving State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India under the Advocates Act.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
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
Describe advocates’ duties and critically assess duties to both court and client under the adversarial system.
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What are an advocate’s duties towards the court?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
List the duties advocates owe different persons, including the court’s presiding officer, and explain how to resolve conflicts among these duties.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss how advocates reconcile their primary duty towards courts, duty towards clients, and obligation to remain courteous to opponents.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
When may an advocate withdraw from a case or return a brief?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Identify the Supreme Court judgment or citation concerning suppression of material facts in advocacy and contempt for abuse of court process.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Do the different duties imposed on lawyers by Bar Council Rules conflict irreconcilably? Assess judicial decisions and comparative legal-profession standards.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss the standards of professional competence, legal reasoning and informed advice required of advocates before the Supreme Court.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain acting in clients’ best interests consistently with the advocate’s status as an officer of the court.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain the distinct obligations owed by an advocate to the court, client, profession, opponents, self, public and State under Bar Council of India Rules.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
How should a Supreme Court lawyer harmonise duties owed to the constitutional court with the client’s best interests?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain the duty to give sober, discreet and honest advice to clients even where such advice may mean losing prospective gains.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain why advocates must avoid unsound arguments, inaccurate pleadings and the concealment of adverse judgments in light of the rule of law.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
How should advocates reconcile their position as officers of the court with the obligation to serve clients’ best interests?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
How can a Supreme Court lawyer reconcile the primary duty to the court with acting in the client’s best interests?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss whether a lawyer making a concession while arguing needs express authorisation from the client.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss an advocate’s duty to state a client’s case fairly and candidly without disrespecting the court.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Must a Supreme Court lawyer disclose a directly relevant adverse precedent overlooked by opposing counsel, even when it damages the client’s case?
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).
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
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
May an advocate charge a percentage-based or success-dependent fee where the client cannot pay fees upfront?
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
May an advocate stand surety for a client or represent a matter in which the advocate has a financial interest?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
An advocate refuses to return an original will entrusted by an executor or beneficiary because legal fees remain unpaid. Is this professional misconduct?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What maximum AOR fee on brief for review petitions is prescribed under Part I of the Second Schedule to the Supreme Court Rules?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Does an advocate have a lien over litigation papers entrusted by a client for payment of unpaid fees? Discuss.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
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
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Assess whether lawyers’ participation in televised or other media debates concerning their own sub judice matters violates professional ethics or can amount to contempt.
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Define a “tout”, discuss Indian law on touting and examine the Supreme Court Registry’s role under the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What is the scope of fair criticism of judgments by advocates, and what responsibilities arise for media reporting on sub judice matters?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain the rationale for prohibiting lawyer advertising and solicitation, citing decisions and examining whether the prohibition remains relevant on social media.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What permissible methods may advocates use for professional self-promotion without contravening Section 49(1)(c) and restrictions on advertising?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain the rules on advertising and solicitation, evaluate their justification and suggest reforms considering widespread use of social media.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
(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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
(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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
May an advocate maintain a professional website? What information can lawfully appear on that website?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
The original paper repeats printed question number 3.
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss why lawyers cannot solicit clients in the same manner businesses solicit customers.
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).
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
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain the scope and exceptions of advocate-client legal privilege, including whether confidentiality survives the termination of the lawyer-client relationship.
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain the prohibition against breaching obligations under Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act in advocate-client communications.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Analyse ethical risks concerning lawyers’ use of social media and privileged data. Should special professional regulations govern this activity?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
(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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
In which exceptional circumstances may an advocate represent an organisation of which the advocate is a member?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Does an advocate’s duty of confidence towards a client survive termination of the engagement? Discuss decided cases and rules.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss why Bar Council rules restrict advocates from representing organisations or institutions whose executive committees they belong to.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss the rule that lawyers should not accept briefs where they know the assigned judge is one before whom they ought not appear.
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).
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
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Examine the prohibition on advocates’ strikes under Article 19, any exceptions, penalties, Supreme Court decisions, and lawful alternatives available to an aggrieved Bar.
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Trace Supreme Court rulings on lawyers’ strikes, boycotts and abstention from court. Do such actions constitute contempt?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Can a High Court prohibit an advocate from practising before itself and subordinate courts? If so, identify the jurisdiction and its limits.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Can a High Court exercise contempt jurisdiction concurrently with disciplinary proceedings of the Bar Council against an advocate? Discuss with cases.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Is an advocate’s strike ethically or legally permissible? Discuss decided cases and the limits of protest.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Assess whether a hunger strike by advocates seeking High Court judicial appointments violates the law against lawyers’ strikes, referring to Krishnakant Tamrakar.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Can strikes by advocates be justified on legal or ethical grounds? Discuss whether they constitute contempt of court or other misconduct.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
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
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain special duties owed by Advocates-on-Record under applicable rules and decided cases.
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss the special obligations of a Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record and evaluate whether the AOR system remains necessary under applicable rules and judgments.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Identify the legal proposition decided in Rameshwar Prasad Goyal (2014) 1 SCC 572.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
When a client wishes to seek review of a Supreme Court judgment, under which circumstances should the AOR agree to file the review petition?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss whether an Advocate-on-Record should refuse to file a petition considered unfit for Supreme Court consideration.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss whether Advocates-on-Record bear a higher duty to the Supreme Court because of the nature of that institution.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Legal aid, criminal defence and amicus curiae
13 question occurrences · grouped by substantive legal issue
Explain the ethical duties of an amicus curiae appointed to assist a party without representation.
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 9 · 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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
In what circumstances may an advocate refuse a brief? Does a Bar Association resolution not to defend an accused person qualify?
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2024, Paper III, Question 12 · 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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Define amicus curiae, explain responsibilities towards the court, and discuss Supreme Court guidelines concerning amicus appointments in criminal trials.
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, 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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Is an advocate obliged to accept briefs before courts where the advocate practises? Elaborate.
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2023, Paper III, Question 12 · 5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Compare the ethical duties of an amicus curiae assisting the court generally and one appointed to represent an otherwise unrepresented party.
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2021, 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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Examine the professional obligation to represent offenders, including high-profile accused persons, against the proposition that such representation corrodes criminal justice.
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2019, 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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
(a) A client admits committing murder and asks for a defence. Should the lawyer accept? (b) Another client admits forging a brother’s signature on a family settlement and asks for a specific-performance suit. Should the lawyer file it?
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, 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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Who is an amicus curiae?
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2018, Paper III, Question 12 · 2 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Should an advocate’s personal belief about an accused person’s guilt influence acceptance or conduct of the criminal defence?
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, 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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss advocates’ responsibilities regarding equal justice and legal aid under Article 39A of the Constitution.
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2015, 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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain why advocates should defend persons accused of crimes regardless of their personal views about guilt.
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2014, Paper III, Question 6. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Must an advocate accept cases involving allegations of rape, terrorism or corruption when the allegations offend the advocate’s personal values?
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 4 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
How does an amicus curiae in public interest litigation differ from counsel acting in adversarial litigation?
Asked in: Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Examination, 2012, Paper III, Question 11 · 12.5 marks. Read original question paper.
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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
Discuss ethical issues arising for a lawyer in mediation, including whether an additional fee may be linked to successful settlement.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What professional ethical standards apply to advocates engaged in mediation and conciliation?
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Explain mediation’s relevance and the role of advocates in promoting mediation.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
How far must lawyers promote conciliation and mediation, and how is this duty linked to professional ethics?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Examine the developing responsibility of lawyers to promote mediation as a preferable means of resolving disputes.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What duties does the Bar have in promoting alternative dispute resolution, and how do these relate to professional ethics?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss the role of lawyers in encouraging mediation as a means of resolving disputes.
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).
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
Explain why effective advocacy requires knowing when not to argue. Identify at least seven features of bad advocacy.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What are Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy, and which is most relevant to present-day Indian practice?
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).
Evidence: B · Attributed reproduction (SCI archive confirms the sitting). Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy and their contemporary relevance.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Is the description of an advocate as a “hired gun” appropriate in light of duties to clients?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss whether innovation and activism within legal boundaries are central to jurisprudential development, with reference to judgments.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Select and discuss any two qualities among Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy, and identify any other qualities that should guide advocates.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss the profession’s role in preserving public trust in justice and propose appropriate reforms to Bar Council of India Rules.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
What are Justice Abbot Parry’s Seven Lamps of Advocacy, which is most significant, and are these qualities relevant to contemporary Indian practice?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Distinguish morals from professional ethics, and examine the relevance of a lawyer’s character to ethical conduct.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Does adversarial litigation turn lawyers into “hired guns” or mouthpieces for their clients? Examine conflicts of values with illustrations.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Is legal ethics necessarily a compromise between competing responsibilities to courts, clients, society and the lawyer’s family livelihood?
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Name the Seven Lamps of Advocacy described by Justice Abbot Parry.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Compare the roles of the legal profession and the judiciary in maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Does adversarial advocacy inevitably turn lawyers into “hired guns” lacking independent ethical judgment? Assess Lord Brougham’s statement in the Trial of Queen Caroline.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Distinguish professional values from professional virtues and explain the relevance of each to professional ethics.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Examine Henry Brougham’s assertion of exclusive loyalty to the client, the “hired gun” conception of advocacy, the adversarial system and Bar Council rules.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Do corporate lawyers owe public responsibilities comparable with those of advocates engaged in court proceedings? Discuss.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Is professional conduct distinct from professional ethics? Examine the relationship between ethics, morality and character.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Critically examine Karl Llewellyn’s observations concerning legal indeterminacy, litigation tactics and the ethics of advocacy.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
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.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss how declining values and standards within the legal profession affect public perception of courts.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
Discuss whether brevity in petitions and oral submissions makes advocacy more effective than lengthy presentation.
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).
Evidence: A · Official Supreme Court paper. Wording: Faithful editorial paraphrase (consult linked original for full wording).
No questions match. Clear filters or try another search.
Source papers and coverage audit
- 2025: 10 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2024: 14 prompts. Attributed reproduction (B · attributed reproduction, sitting listed on SCI archive).
- 2023: 14 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2022: 15 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2021: 15 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2019: 11 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2018: 20 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2017: 14 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2016: 12 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2015: 12 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2014: 7 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 2013: 9 prompts. Official Supreme Court PDF (A · official).
- 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.
