SC junks PIL for 3-yr law course instead of 5

NEW DELHI: Observing that the legal profession needed “mature people”, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a PIL seeking directions to the Centre and the Bar Council of India to set up an expert committee for exploring the feasibility of introducing a three-year LLB course after class 12 instead of the existing five-year course.

A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala said the five-year LLB (Bachelor of Law) course is “working fine” and there was no need to tinker with it.

“Why have a three-year course at all? They can start practice (of law) after high school only!... According to me, even 5 years is too less,” the CJI said. “We need mature people coming into the profession. This 5-year course has been very beneficial,” the bench said while permitting the PIL to be withdrawn.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh appeared for lawyer-petitioner Ashwini Updhyay. The senior advocate said even in the United Kingdom, the law course is for three years and the present five-year LLB course here is a “disincentive for the poor, especially girls “. The CJI disagreed with his submissions and said 70 per cent women have entered district judiciary this time and now more girls are taking up law. Singh sought the court’s permission to withdraw the PIL with liberty to make a representation to the BCI for introducing such a course. The bench disallowed his request to approach the BCI and permitted only the withdrawal of the PIL. The PIL was filed through lawyer Ashwani Dubey.

At present, students can pursue a five-year integrated law course after class 12 for which they need to clear the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) adopted by the premier National Law Universities (NLUs). Students can also pursue a three-year LLB course after graduating in any discipline.