In a potentially transformative proposal aimed at addressing the financial struggles of young advocates, the Supreme Court on Friday suggested the creation of a Young Lawyers’ Professional Assistance Fund, which could be financed through contributions from successful lawyers, a portion of court fees collected by the judiciary, and even costs imposed in judicial proceedings.
The proposal came in a public interest litigation filed by a group of women advocates raising concerns regarding inadequate facilities for women lawyers and the broader challenges faced by young members of the legal profession. While examining these issues, the Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana observed that the initial years of litigation practice are marked by a steep learning curve, uncertain income, and dependence on modest stipends from seniors.
Young advocates often spend years observing court proceedings, assisting senior lawyers, and learning courtroom practice before developing an independent clientele. For many, particularly first-generation lawyers and those from economically weaker backgrounds, the lack of financial support becomes a significant barrier to continuing in the profession, the court noted.
Highlighting the consequences of this reality, the Court warned of a potential “brain drain” within the legal profession, noting that talented and capable young lawyers are often compelled to abandon litigation in favour of more financially stable careers. The Court remarked:
“
“the rewards of practice accrue with time and perseverance, and that young advocates must remain steadfast through the initial years of struggle. While this is largely true, it presupposes the existence of a financial and social support network that enables a young lawyer to endure that period of uncertainty. Not every aspiring advocate enjoys such support and for many, the decision whether or not to continue in litigation is influenced much more by economic considerations than merit or dedication.”
To address these concerns, the Court proposed the establishment of a Young Lawyers’ Professional Assistance Fund under the exclusive control of jurisdictional High Courts or an autonomous body constituted by the Union and State Governments. The Court noted that such a structure would inspire greater confidence among prospective donors and contributors.
Proposed Funding Sources
The Court outlined multiple potential sources of funding:
• Contributions and donations from successful senior advocates and other members of the Bar;
• A portion of court fees collected by the judiciary;
• A substantial share of costs imposed by courts in judicial proceedings;
• Additional contributions supported through a statutory framework enacted by the legislature.
To encourage participation, the Court suggested that contributors could be incentivised through tax exemptions, national awards, or other forms of recognition.
Monthly Stipends for Young Advocates
The proposed fund would be used to provide a reasonable monthly stipend to young advocates, particularly first-generation lawyers and those from economically and socially disadvantaged backgrounds. The Court suggested that beneficiaries should simultaneously work under experienced members of the Bar as associates, thereby continuing their professional training while receiving financial assistance.
The Bench further proposed that financial support should be sufficient to ensure basic sustenance during the first three years of practice and gradually taper off over six to seven years as the advocate becomes self-sufficient and establishes an independent practice.
A Self-Sustaining Model
The Court also suggested a mechanism under which advocates who benefited from the scheme could later contribute back to the fund through phased monthly instalments once they become financially stable. Such a model, the Court observed, could help create a self-sustaining corpus capable of supporting successive generations of young lawyers.
While clarifying that these observations are tentative and illustrative, the Court recognised the far-reaching implications of the issue and issued notice to the Union of India, States and Union Territories. The Attorney General and Advocate Generals have been requested to assist the Court on the proposals.