Successful Completion Bridge Course Does Not Exempt Foreign Law Graduates From BCI's Qualifying Exam Requirement: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court ruled that foreign law degree holders must take the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) qualifying exam to practice law in India, even if they have completed a bridge course at an Indian law college.
The case involved a law graduate who had completed her legal studies at the University of Buckingham and a two-year bridge course at National Law University, Delhi (NLUD). She argued that since she had already passed exams at the University of Buckingham and the bridge course, which were recognized by the BCI, she should not be required to take the additional qualifying exam.
A Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula stated that the BCI’s qualifying exam is mandatory to assess the readiness of foreign law graduates to meet the professional standards required for legal practice in India.
The Court said, "The successful completion of the bridge course undoubtedly grants the Petitioner equivalency in educational terms; however, it does not dispense with the statutory requirement to appear for the Qualifying Examination,”
Advocate Manish Kaushik appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Preetpal Singh appeared for the respondents.
The Court pointed out that the law graduate had been informed about the need to clear the qualifying exam to practice law in India and had acknowledged this requirement when she opted to undertake the bridge course. It referred to a communication from the BCI in 2021, which highlighted the qualifying exam as a precondition for enrollment and legal practice in India.
The Court also distinguished the case from a recent judgment by the Karnataka High Court, where a graduate in a similar position was exempted from taking the exam.
The Court noted that the Karnataka ruling applied to a different regulatory framework and notifications from 2023, while in this case, newer BCI notifications issued in 2024 applied. As a result, the Court emphasized that the Karnataka High Court’s ruling could not be applied in this instance.
Cause Title: Mehak Oberoi v. Bar Council of India & Ors., [2024:DHC:9320]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Manish Kaushik, Mishal Johari, Ajit Singh Joher, Anubhav Gupta, Aryan Pandey, Chirag Sharma, Mainak Sarkar and Aparna Kushwah
Respondents: Advocates Preetpal Singh, Yash Saini, T Singhdev, Tanishq Srivastava, Yamini Singh, Abhijit Chakravarty, Arun Hussain, Bhanu Gulati, and Aabhas Sukhramani
