“5-Year Law Course Beneficial, Need Mature People In Profession”: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court refused to entertain a petition seeking to allow a 3-year LL.B degree course right after the 12th standard. The petitioner Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay argued against the five-year law course for being it time-consuming and irrational. The bench comprised of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala declined to admit the petition which caused the petitioner to withdraw it.

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh appeared for the petitioner demanding the provision of having 3 years law degree instead of its current 5 years. The petitioner said that the course duration is lengthy and the prolonged period of 5 years is not suitable for students. The present 5-year course is not proportional to studying law and it additionally puts a financial burden on students while completing the course, the advocate argued.

Vikas Singh also presented the fact that the United Kingdom also provides a law degree with 3 years duration, so India can also follow the same pattern.

The petitioner sought direction for the Centre and Bar Council of India to form an Expert Committee for a feasibility study of a 3-Year Bachelor of Law course after the 12th Standard similar to the Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Commerce, and Bachelor of Art courses.

The petition argued that the students can study 15-20 subjects in 03 years or 06 semesters without any problem. Therefore, the present duration of 05 years or 10 semesters to complete the course is arbitrary and irrational and hence violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Countering the petitioner’s arguments, which can draw similar petitions in the future regarding further scrapping of course duration, CJI commented, “Someone might ask, why have a three-year course at all and allow practice of law right after high school?”.

The petitioner also put another argument concerning the impact of the 5-year duration of the LL.B course on girls’ education in this profession. Negating the given argument regarding the impact of 5-year degrees on the girl’s profession, CJI asserted, “Over 50% of students who are entering law school are girls. 70% of district judiciary are now girls,”.

“We need mature people coming into the profession. This 5-year course has been very beneficial,” CJI asserted.

CJI reiterated the refusal to entertain the matter and said, “According to me, even 5 years is too little”.

Singh requested that the Bar Council of India be asked to consider the petition as a representation and it should be allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to approach the Bar Council. However, the Court did not grant such liberty and just allowed the withdrawal of the petition.