COURSE MANUAL

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS & BAR-BENCH RELATIONS

Spring 2024
(AY 2023-24)

Name of Faculty
Prof. Anuj Chand
Prof. Amalesh Prasad
Prof. Aveek Chakravarty
Prof. Gowri Murali Belawadi
Prof. Harsh Manohar
Prof. Isha Bansal
Prof. Matthew John Byrne
Prof. Pallavi Goel
Prof. Pankhuri Agarwal
Prof. Sakshi Srivastava
Prof. Santwana Dwivedy
Prof. Sanya Darakhshan Kishwar
Prof. Shambhavi Shivani
Prof. Suravi Podder

1
 CONTENTS

PART I
General Information……………………………………………………………………………Page 3

PART II

a. Course Description……………………………………………………………….…………Page 4

b. Course Aims…………………………………………………………………………………..Page 4
c. Grading of Student Achievement………………………………………………….....Page 4

PART III

a. Keyword Syllabus…………………………………………………………………………Page 6
b. Course Policies……………………………………………………………………………..Page 6

PART IV

a. Weekly Course Outline …………………………………………………………............Page 8

b. Readings………………………………………………………………………………………Page 9

2
 PART I

General Information

General Information on, PROFESSIONAL ETHICS & BAR BENCH

RELATIONS, offered by Jindal Global Law School
of the AY 2023-24

The information provided herein is by the Course Coordinator. The following

information contains the official record of the details of the course.

This information shall form part of the University database and may be
uploaded to the KOHA Library system and catalogued and may be distributed
amongst final year Law students for B.A.LL.B. (Hons), B.B.A.LL.B. (Hons);
B.Com. LL.B. (Hons), B.A. (Hons) Legal Studies, B.A. (Hons) Criminology
and Criminal Justice; LL.B.; and LL.M. courses if necessary.

Course Title: Professional Ethics and Bar Bench Relations

Course Code: L-CC-0003
Course Duration: One Semester
No. of Credit Units: 4
Level: BBA LLB 2020, BA LLB 2020, LLB 2021
Medium of
Instruction: English

3
 PART II

a. Course Description
This course will analyse the professional ethics as prescribed by the Bar Council of India, in
addition to covering critical readings in the area. The Course shall introduce (a) the regulation
of the legal profession as per the Advocates Act, 1961 and other statutes, and (b) the ethical
underpinning of legal rules. One module of the syllabus will also focus on Indian case laws as
well as global debates in the field of legal ethics so as to make the course comparative and
engaging.

b. Course Aims

At the end of the course, students will:

(a) Have developed a critical understanding of issues inherent in the area of lawyers’
professional ethics and common scenarios in which they typically arise.
(b) Understand and apply the legal rights and duties of an advocate, judge or any participant
in legal profession.
(c) Developed an understanding of the practical issues in application of ethical obligations of
an advocate.
(d) Intelligently and constructively critique the legal and ethical rules.
(e) Negotiate the wider concept of ethics and lawyers’ role in the community in speech and
action.

c. Grading of Student Achievement

To pass this course, students must obtain a minimum of 40% in the

cumulative aspects of coursework, e.g. moot, and final examination. End of
semester exam will carry 50 marks out of which students have to obtain a
minimum of 15 marks to fulfil the requirement of passing the course.

The details of the grades as well as the criteria for awarding such grades are provided
below.

Letter Percentage Grade Definitions

Grade Of marks
O 80% and above Outstanding Outstanding
work with strong
evidence of
knowledge of the
subject matter,
excellent

4
 organizational
capacity, ability
to synthesize and
critically analyse
and originality in
thinking and
presentation.
A+ 75 to 79.75% Excellent Sound knowledge
of the subject
matter, thorough
understanding of
issues; ability to
synthesize
critically and
analyse
A 70 to 74.75% Good Good
understanding of
the subject
matter, ability to
identify issues
and provide
balanced
solutions to
problems and
good critical and
analytical skills.
A- 65 to 69.75% Adequate Adequate
knowledge of the
subject matter to
go to the next
level of study and
reasonable
critical and
analytical skills.
B+ 60 to 64.75% Marginal Limited
knowledge of the
subject matter,
irrelevant use of
materials and
poor critical and
analytical skills.
B 55 to 59.75% Poor Poor
comprehension
of the subject
matter; poor
critical and
analytical skills

5
 and marginal use
of the relevant
materials.
B- 50 to 54.75% Pass “Pass” in a pass-
fail course. “P”
indicative of at
least the basic
understanding of
the subject
matter.

NEW COURSE LETTER GRADES AND THEIR INTERPRETATION

Letter Percentage Grade
Interpretation
Grade of Marks Points
Pass 1: Pass with Basic understanding of
P1 45 - 49 2
the subject matter.
Pass 2: Pass with Rudimentary
P2 40 - 44 1
understanding of the subject matter.
Fail: Poor comprehension of the subject
matter; poor critical and analytical skills
F Below 40 0
and marginal use of the relevant materials.
Will require repeating the course.
“Extenuating circumstances” preventing
the student from taking the examination;
I Absent
the Vice Dean (Examinations) at their
discretion assign the “Ab” grade.

PART III

a. Keyword Syllabus

Introduction to the area of legal ethics, adversarial system, lawyers and dignity, law and social
service and pro bono work, law and popular culture and literature, duty to defend and legal ethics,
defending the guilty, badgering of witnesses and introduction of evidence by lawyers, Regulation
of lawyers, Lawyers and fee structures, Amicus Curiae, Strikes by lawyers, Adjournments, Draft
professional ethics analysis, Analysing Indian Supreme Court case laws on professional
misconduct

b. Course/Class Policies

Cell Phones, Laptops and Similar Gadgets

6
Academic Integrity and Plagiarism

Learning and knowledge production of any kind is a collaborative process. Collaboration

demands an ethical responsibility to acknowledge who we have learnt from, what we have
learned, and how reading and learning from others have helped us shape our own ideas.
Even our own ideas demand an acknowledgement of the sources and processes through
which those ideas have emerged. Thus, all ideas must be supported by citations. All ideas
borrowed from articles, books, journals, magazines, case laws, statutes, photographs,
films, paintings, etc., in print or online, must be credited with the original source. If the
source or inspiration of your idea is a friend, a casual chat, something that you overheard,
or heard being discussed at a conference or in class, even they must be duly credited. If
you paraphrase or directly quote from a web source in the examination, presentation or
essays, the source must be acknowledged. The university has a framework to deal with
cases of plagiarism. All form of plagiarism will be taken seriously by the University and
prescribed sanctions will be imposed on those who commit plagiarism.

Disability Support and Accommodation Requirements

JGU endeavours to make all its courses accessible to students. In accordance with the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016), the JGU Disability Support Committee
(DSC) has identified conditions that could hinder a student’s overall well-being. These
include physical and mobility related difficulties, visual and hearing impairment, mental
health conditions and intellectual/learning difficulties e.g., dyslexia, dyscalculia. Students
with any known disability needing academic and other support are required to register
with the Disability Support Committee (DSC) by following the procedure specified at
https://jgu.edu.in/disability-support-committee/

Students who need support may register any time during the semester up until a month
before the end semester examination begins. Those students who wish to continue
receiving support from the previous semester, must re-register within the first month of
a semester. Last minute registrations and support might not be possible as sufficient time
is required to make the arrangements for support.

The DSC maintains strict confidentiality about the identity of the student and the nature
of their disability and the same is requested from faculty members and staff as well. The
DSC takes a strong stance against in-class and out-of-class references made about a
student’s disability without their consent and disrespectful comments referring to a
student’s disability.

All general queries are to be addressed to [email protected]

Safe Space Pledge

This course may discuss a range of issues and events that might result in distress for some
students. Discussions in the course might also provoke strong emotional responses. To
make sure that all students collectively benefit from the course, and do not feel disturbed
due to either the content of the course or the conduct of the discussions. Therefore, it is

7
incumbent upon all within the classroom to pledge to maintain respect towards our peers.
This does not mean that you need to feel restrained about what you feel and what you
want to say. Conversely, this is about creating a safe space where everyone can speak and
learn without inhibitions and fear. This responsibility lies not only with students, but also
with the instructor.

P.S. The course instructor, as part of introducing the course manual, will discuss the scope
of the Safe Space Pledge with the class.

PART IV

a. Weekly Course Outline

Week 1 Understanding ‘virtue’ and its content

Understanding different approaches to ethics and understanding the

Week 2 demands of individual virtue as opposed to institutional virtue

Week 3 Critiquing Legal Education as a means for instilling professional ethics

Week 4 Theoretical premise for lawyer-client relationship

Bar Council of India Rules on Standards of Professional Ethics:

Duties: Duty to the court; Duty to the client; Duty to the opponent; Duty to
the colleagues; Duty in imparting training; Duty to render legal aid;
Week 5 Restriction on other employments

Professional or Other Misconduct: Powers of the Disciplinary Committee

of the Bar Council of India, Procedure of complaints against Advocates,
Punishments for misconduct and Remedies against order of punishment
Week 6

Regulation of lawyers. Exploring the way ahead for addressing

malpractices by lawyers on the lines of doctors
Week 7

Contempt of Court Act, Meaning and kinds of contempt, Defences

available to contemnor, Nature and extent of Punishment, Remedies
available and Contempt by Lawyers, Judges, State & Corporate bodies
Week 8

8
 Adjournment and Delay
Week 9
Strike by the lawyers and constitutional position on it
Week 10
Right to Advertisement by lawyers
Week 11
Contemporary debates relating to Bar and Bench relations
Week 12

Week 13 Landmark Cases

Week 14 Revision

b. Readings

WEEK 1
1. Plato’s Apology of Socrates (Could be retrieved from
http://www.sjsu.edu/people/james.lindahl/courses/Phil70A/s3/apology.pdf )
2. Plato’s Meno, translated by J. Holbo and B. Waring (Could be retrieved from
https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/joel.wallenberg/ContextsJoelGeoff/meno.pdf
Optional Reading:
1. Immanuel Kant’s Moral Philosophy (Could be retrieved from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/ )

WEEK 2
1. M.B.E. Smith, ‘Should lawyers listen to Philosophers about Legal Ethics’, (1990), Law &
Philosophy, Vol. 9. No. 1, pp. 67 – 93
2. Alice Woolley, ‘If Philosophical Legal Ethics is the Answer, What is the Question’,
(2010), The University of Toronto Law Journal, Vol. 60, No. 4, pp. 983 – 1001

WEEK 3
1. Duncan Kennedy, ‘Legal Education as Training for Hierarchy’, in The Politics of Law (David
Kairys ed., Pantheon, 1998), (1st ed. 1982, 2nd ed. 1990, 3d. 1998), available at
http://duncankennedy.net/documents/Legal%20Education%20as%20Training%20for%20Hie
rarchy_Politics%20of%20Law.pdf
2. Lorie M. Graham, ‘Aristotle’s Ethics & Virtuous Lawyer’, (1996) 20 J. Legal Prof. 5, available
at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=991661

9
3. David B. Wilkins, ‘Professional Ethics for Lawyers and Law Schools: Interdisciplinary
Education and the Law School’s Ethical Obligation to Study and Teach about the Profession’,
12 Legal Education Review 47 (2001) (Australia), available at
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/LegEdRev/2001/5.html

Optional Reading:

1. Ipshita Sengupta, ‘Nurturing Caring Lawyers: Rethinking Professional Ethics &

Responsibility in India’, (2014) 5 J. Indian L. & Society 13, available at
http://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/E45CDC05-BF94-46F6-A9A3-
81424EE2DABD.pdf
2. Re: Regina Guha vs Unknown 1916 35 Ind Cas 925

WEEK 4
1. Charles Fried, ‘The Lawyer as a Friend: The Moral Foundations of the Lawyer-Client
Relation’, (1976), The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 85, No. 8, pp. 1060 -1089
2. Paul Lannon, ‘A Lawyer In Pursuit Of Truth and Unity: Mohandas Gandhi and the
Private Practice of Law’, (2011) 44 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 665.

Optional Readings:

1. Richard Wasserstrom, ‘Lawyers as Professionals: Some Moral Issues’, (1975), Human

Rights, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1 – 24

WEEK 5
1. Bar Council of India Rules on Professional Standards and Etiquettes.
2. Deborah L. Rhode, ‘Legal Ethics in an Adversary System: The Persistent Questions’,
(2006), Hofstra Law Review, Vol. 34, pp. 641 – 671 (Could be retrieved from
https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2396&context=hlr
)
3. Monroe Freedman, ‘Criminal responsibility of the Criminal Defense lawyer- three
hardest questions’ (1966) 64 Mich. L. Rev. 1469.
4. Marc Galanter and Nick Robinson India's Grand Advocates: A Legal Elite Flourishing in
the Era of Globalization International Journal of the Legal Profession, Vol. 20, No. 3
(2013).
5. Kuldeep Agarwal vs State Of Uttarakhand (3 September, 2019), available at
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/18440432/?type=print
6. Abbe Smith, “How can anyone defend Harvey Weinstein? Duty.”, The Washington Post
(March 21, 2019), available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-can-

10
 anyone-defend-harvey-weinstein-duty/2019/03/20/25f6c920-4759-11e9-90f0-
0ccfeec87a61_story.html
7. Elaine Craig, “The Ethical Obligations of Defence Counsel in Sexual Assault Cases”,
Osgoode Hall Law Journal (2014), available at
https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.googl
e.com/&httpsredir=1&article=2729&context=ohlj
8. “Bar association’s resolution not to allow lawyer to accused illegal: SC”, The Times of
India (September 19, 2017), available at
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/60739080.cms?utm_source=contentofinte
rest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

Optional Reading:

1. Tom Lininger, “Green Ethics for Lawyers”, Boston College Law Review (2016), available
at https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3479&context=bclr
2. Abhinav Chandrachud, “From Hyderabad to Harvard: How U.S. Law Schools Make
Clerking on India’s Supreme Court Worthwhile”, International Journal of the Legal
Profession (2014), available at
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09695958.2014.962539 or
https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=2413576
3. Barbara Babcock, ‘Duty to defend’ (2005) 114 Yale Law Journal 1489.
4. Bradley Wendel, ‘Should Law Schools Teach Professional Duties, Professional Virtues,
or Something Else? A Critique of the Carnegie Report on Educating Lawyers,’
University of St. Thomas Law Journal, Cornell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-32
(Could be retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1963838 )
5. IBA Guidelines on Party Representation in International Arbitration, 2013.
6. ‘Cross Currents? How National Ethics Rules Affect International Arbitration’, Carlos
González-Bueno (ed), 40 under 40 International Arbitration (2018), (Carlos González-
Bueno Catalán de Ocón; Dykinson, S.L. 2018) pp. 411 – 422

WEEK 6 AND 7
1. Advocates Act of 1961
2. Fred C. Zacharias, ‘The Myth of Self-Regulations’, (2009), Minnesota Law Review, Vol.
93, pp. 1147 – 1190 (Could be retrieved from http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/01/Zacharias_MLR.pdf )
3. Gabriel J. Chin & Scott C. Wells, ‘Can a Reasonable Doubt have an Unreasonable Price?
Limitations on Attorneys’ Fee in Criminal Cases’, (2000), Boston College Law Review,
Vol. 41, Issue. 1, pp. 1 – 70
4. Chapter 2 on Fees and Retainers from Raju Ramachandran’s Professional Ethics for
Lawyers (Lexis Nexis), 2nd Edition, pp. 37 - 53
5. Indian Medical Association v. V. P. Shanta 1996 AIR 550 (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/723973/ )

11
 6. Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab (2005) (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/871062/ )
7. D. K. Gandhi v. M. Mathias (2007) (Could be retrieved from
http://ncdrc.nic.in/RP139206.htm )
8. B. Sunitha vs State of Telangana available at http://www.livelaw.in/legal-ethics-sc-asks-
govt-consider-bringing-regulatory-mechanism-check-violation-ethics-lawyers-read-
judgment/
Optional Readings:

1. Lester Brickman, ‘ABA Regulations of Contingency Fees: Money Talks, Ethics Walks’,
(1996), Fordham Law Review, Vol. 65, Issue. 1, pp. 247 – 235
2. David Wilkins, ‘Who should regulate lawyers?’ (1992) Vol. 105, No. 4 Harvard Law
Review 799-887.
3. The Bar Standards Board handbook for Barristers in England and Wales (Could be
retrieved from
https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media/1663630/bsb_handbook_sept_2015.pdf )

WEEK 8
1. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
2. E. M. S. Namboodiripad v. T. Narayanan Nambiyar AIR 1970 SC 2015 (Could be
retrieved from http://indiankanoon.org/doc/625529/ )
3. In Re. V. C. Mishra AIR 1995 SC 2348 (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/761887/)
4. Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998) (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1666530/
5. Gautam Bhatia Offend, Shock, or Disturb: Free Speech under the Indian Constitution
Oxford University Press 2016
6. Law Commission of India, “Review of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (Limited to
Section 2 of the Act)”, Report No. 274 (April 2018), available at
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report274.pdf

Optional Readings:

1. Law Commission of U.K. consultation paper no. 207 on ‘Contempt of Court –

Scandalising the Court’.
2. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), (Could be retrieved from
http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/FileServer/2015-03-24_1427183283.pdf )

WEEK 9
1. M/s Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast Pvt. Ltd. & Ors (2011) 9 SCC 678

12
 2. Ramrameshwari Devi v/s. Nirmala Devi (2011 (8) SCC 249 : 2011 (6) Scale 677)
3. 240th Report of the Law Commission of India (2012) (Original report could be retrieved
from http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/report240.pdf )
Optional Readings:

1. Jayanth K. Krishnan & C. Rajkumar, “Delay in Process, Denial of Justice: The

Jurisprudence and Empirics of Speedy Trials in Comparative Perspective”, Georgetown
Journal of International Law (2011), available at
http://ghconline.gov.in/library/document/conference2728072018/IV1Delay%20in%20Pro
cess,%20Denial%20of%20Justice.pdf

WEEK 10
1. Common Cause Society v. Union of India AIR 2004 SC 4442
2. Sriram Panchu, ‘When Lawyers Stay Away From Courts’, (19th June, 2013), The Hindu
(Could be retrieved at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/when-lawyers-stay-away-
from-courts/article4827463.ece )
3. Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45
4. Law Comission Report 266 available at
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report266.pdf

WEEK 11
1. Chapter 7 on Right to Advertise from Raju Ramachandran’s Professional Ethics for
Lawyers (Lexis Nexis), 2nd Edition, pp. 119 – 128
2. Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.C. Dabholkar (1976) 2 SCC 291
3. Hazard Jr., Pearce and Stempel, ‘Why Should Lawyers Be Allowed to Advertise: A
Market Analysis of Legal Services’, (1983), Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship Series,
Paper 2398, (Could be retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3296&context=fss_paper
s)

WEEK 12
1. BCI vs AK Balaji and Others
https://www.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2012/13890/13890_2012_Judgement_13-Mar-
2018.pdf
2. Chapter 4 on Senior Counsel from Raju Ramachandran’s Professional Ethics for Lawyers
(Lexis Nexis), 2nd Edition, pp. 75 – 79
3. Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India (2018), available at
https://www.livelaw.in/breaking-cant-restrict-mps-and-mlas-from-practicing-law-
sc/?infinitescroll=1

13
WEEK 13
1. R.K. Anand v. Registrar, Delhi High Court (2009) 8 SCC 106
2. An Advocate v. Bar Council of India 1989 Supp (2) SCC 25
3. Salil Dutta v. T.M. and M.C. (P) Ltd. (1993) 2 SCC 185
4. State of Maharashtra v. Budhikota Subbarao (1993) 3 SCC 71
5. C. Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee (1995) 5 SCC 457
6. P.D. Gupta v. Ram Murti (1997) 7 SCC 147
7. T.C. Mathai v. District & Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram (1999) 3 SCC 614
8. D.P. Chadha v. Triyugi Narain Mishra (2001) 2 SCC 221
9. Shambhu Ram Yadav v. Hanuman Das Khatry (2001) 6 SCC 1
10. Pravin C. Shah v. K.A. Mohd. Ali (2001) 8 SCC 650
11. Bhupinder Kumar Sharma v. Bar Assn., Pathankot (2002) 1 SCC 470

WEEK 14
Revision Week

14