⚖️ SUPREME COURT — REVIEW JUDGMENT
3-Year Practice Rule Modified to 1 Year
Case: Bhumika Trust v. Union of India & Connected Cases
W.P.(C) No. 1110/2025 & Connected Matters
1️⃣ Mandatory Practice Requirement
The 3-year mandatory Bar practice requirement from the May 2025 judgment has been reduced to 1 year of active practice.
Court maintained that prior legal exposure is necessary before entering judicial service.
However, sudden restoration of the 3-year rule caused hardship to young law graduates, women and persons with disabilities.
2️⃣ TRANSITION PERIOD
Notifications issued from 25 May 2025 to 31 March 2027
All law graduates can apply without prior practice or Practice Certificate.
Candidates will be deemed to have completed 1 year of active practice.
Selected candidates → Trainee Judicial Officers
1 year intensive training at State Judicial Academy
→ treated as 1 year Bar practice
Followed by 1 year structured law clerkship.
3️⃣ FROM 1 APRIL 2027 ONWARDS
For notifications issued on/after 1 April 2027:
Minimum 1 year active Bar practice is mandatory.
Practice must be verified through a Certificate of Practice based on recorded participation in effective judicial proceedings.
After selection:
1 year Judicial Academy training
1 year structured law clerkship
4️⃣ STRUCTURE OF 1-YEAR CLERKSHIP
First 6 months:
Under Principal District Judge / members of Higher Judicial Service.
Next 6 months:
Under sitting Judge(s) of the concerned High Court.
💰 EMOLUMENTS
During training + clerkship, Trainee Judicial Officers will receive 50% of the gross remuneration payable to a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC).
5️⃣ REGULAR APPOINTMENT
After completion of training + clerkship:
Satisfactory reasoned evaluation by the supervising High Court Judge
⬇️
Regular appointment to judicial cadre
⬇️
Regular pay scale + service benefits
⚖️ KEY TAKEAWAY
3 Years Practice ❌ → 1 Year Practice ✅
Post-graduation ≠ Bar Practice: SC rejected the contention that an LL.M./post-graduation in law can be treated as equivalent to Bar practice for Civil Judge (Junior Division) eligibility.
The Court has retained the principle that prior legal experience/exposure is essential before becoming a Judicial Officer.
Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justice August George Masih & Justice K. Vinod Chandran (dissenting).
Other Key Directions
State Governments + High Courts must amend rules within 3 months.
Scheme will remain in force for 5 years, after which its effectiveness will be reviewed
⚖️ Justice K. Vinod Chandran — Dissenting Opinion:
No ground for review: He held that the earlier 3-year Bar practice requirement should not have been modified.
Prior practice is essential: Fresh law graduates should not directly enter judicial service because courtroom experience cannot be fully replaced by academic knowledge or training.
Why practice matters: Bar practice develops drafting, legal research, cross-examination, argument formulation, court procedure and understanding of litigants’ problems.
Judicial service ≠ other civil services: Judicial officers independently decide matters involving life, liberty, property and reputation; therefore, prior legal experience is particularly important.
Training cannot fully substitute practice: A structured training programme cannot provide the same first-hand experience of the justice-delivery system.
Against 2-year training model: He considered the proposed 1-year Academy training + 1-year clerkship impractical, costly and potentially discriminatory.
Core view: Experience at the Bar is indispensable before becoming a Judge.
Conclusion: He dismissed the Review Petitions and disagreed with the majority's modification of the 3-year practice requirement.
7
3
1August 21, 2026 1.6K 16
