The Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) has submitted recommendations to the Supreme Court concerning the code of conduct for Advocates-on-Record and the process for senior designation.

The Court addressed these issues in a case involving a Senior Advocate who made false statements and suppressed material facts in multiple remission pleas.

According to its suggestions, SCAORA noted that the Supreme Court's judgments in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (2017) and (2023) have significantly democratized and streamlined the senior designation process by establishing objective criteria. However, the Association has also proposed certain modifications to further refine the process.

Following the submission of a false affidavit by a Senior Advocate and an Advocate-on-Record, a bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and A.G. Masih decided to establish guidelines on the conduct of AORs. Subsequently, Senior Advocate Dr. S. Muralidhar was appointed as Amicus Curiae in the case, and the court sought assistance from SCAORA President Vipin Nair.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta called for a reconsideration of the Senior Advocate designation process, which is governed by the Supreme Court’s 2017 judgment in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India. Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Dr. S. Muralidhar proposed introducing a secret ballot system for selecting lawyers for Senior Advocate designation.

Last week, the bench reserved judgment.