The Bar Council of India (BCI) has sought detailed records from the Bar Council of West Bengal regarding former Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s enrolment and legal practice status after she appeared before the Calcutta High Court wearing advocate robes on Thursday.
This incident has raised a broader issue that is currently under discussion among the legal fraternity, on whether Mamata Banerjee falls under the definition of ‘advocate’ as per the Advocates Act, 1961.
In a letter dated May 14, 2026, the BCI directed the State Bar Council to furnish all official records related to Mamata Banerjee’s enrolment, certificate of practice, suspension/cessation of practice, and subsequent resumption of practice.
Also Read | Mamata Banerjee arrives at Calcutta High Court in lawyer’s attire for post-poll case
The letter, issued by BCI Principal Secretary Srimanto Sen, referred to media reports showing Banerjee appearing before the Calcutta High Court in advocate attire, including white bands and robes. The BCI cited Bar Council rules governing professional conduct, dress code and entitlement to practise before courts.
BCI seeks clarity on enrolment and practice status
While the BCI stopped short of declaring her appearance improper, it made clear that the issue required factual verification from official records.
“Having regard to the constitutional public office held by her during the said period, and without expressing any opinion at this stage on the permissibility or otherwise of such appearance, the Bar Council of India requires the factual status of her enrolment, practice, suspension, if any, and resumption, if any, to be verified from your records,” the letter stated.
The BCI has specifically asked the State Bar Council to clarify:
Banerjee’s enrolment number and enrolment date
Whether her name continues on the State Roll of Advocates
Whether she informed the Bar Council about the suspension or cessation of practice during her tenure as Chief Minister
Whether she later applied for the resumption of practice
Whether any valid certificate of practice currently exists in her favour
The national body has also sought certified copies of all supporting documents, including enrolment registers, practice records, inward registers and official file notings.
Focus shifts to Advocates Act and right to practise
The controversy has now shifted beyond optics to a legal interpretation of the Advocates Act, 1961 and Bar Council rules governing active legal practice.
Under the Advocates Act, only individuals enrolled on the State Roll and holding valid practice status are entitled to practise law before courts. Questions are now being raised over whether a person holding constitutional office for over a decade can automatically resume courtroom appearances without formal restoration or continuation of practice records.
The BCI letter also directed the West Bengal Bar Council to preserve all original records relating to Banerjee “without alteration, correction, overwriting, interpolation or reconstruction.”
Also Read | Who was Sudhangshu Seal? CPM veteran, ex-MP and five-time councillor passes away at 81
The State Bar Council has been asked to submit its response by May 16.
The issue comes at a politically sensitive moment following Banerjee’s recent exit from office, with her courtroom appearance immediately drawing attention from sections of the legal fraternity and political observers alike.
While no formal finding has yet been made against Banerjee, the BCI’s intervention has effectively turned the spotlight onto a central legal question: whether she currently satisfies the statutory definition and regulatory requirements of an “advocate” under Indian law.
