The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a PIL to turn the five-year graduation for law degree into a 3-year law graduation degree course directly after school. The top court did not agree with the petitioner and even made a sarcastic remark that, "why even have a three-year course at all...students can start practicing law after high school only!"
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said that in his opinion even five years of legal studies is also less. "For us it was Bachelor of Arts for three years and then we could persue law."
The CJI further said that the five year course is beneficial and mature people are needed in the profession.
The Court eventually allowed Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay to withdraw his PIL.
Upadhyay in his PIL contended that students can easily study 15-20 subjects in 03 years i.e. 06 semesters. And therefore, the present duration of 05 years i.e. 10 semesters for Bachelor of Law Course is unreasonable and the inordinate duration is arbitrary and irrational and hence violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
At present, the LL.B course which the students can join after passing 12th standard is for a period of 5 years. The three-year law degree course is available only for graduates. The PIL was filed under under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking direction to the Centre and Bar Council of India to form an Expert Committee to ascertain the feasibility of starting a 3 Years Bachelor of Law Course after 12th Standard like Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Art Courses.
"The undue 05 years’ time is arbitrary and irrational for many reasons. Firstly, the length of time is not necessary to give a Bachelor degree, secondly, the prolonged period of 05 years is not suitable for students, thirdly, the 05 precious years is not proportional to study Law and fourthly, this puts excessive financial burden on the students to complete such a lengthy degree. Had there been less time of 03 years for finishing the bachelor degree, the student could have gotten 02 undisturbed years to obtain practical knowledge in Court or Law Firm or to pursue Master degree or to prepare for judicial exam," the PIL read.
The petitioner cited the examples of late legal stalwarts Ram Jethmalani, who started law practice at the age of 18 years. He also cited Fali S Nariman's example who completed the law degree at the age of 21 years.
"Petitioner respectfully submits that if the colleges can give Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Science degree immediately after the 12th standard in 03 years, then why is it not feasible to give Bachelor of Law degree in 03 years? Students don't need a Bachelor of Arts to gain preliminary knowledge or law. Then why should Students be forced to waste 2 years obtaining it?," he asked.
He further told the court that "It appears that the unreasonable 05 years length of the Law Course has been set under the Pressure of College Management so as to make the most amount of money they could from the course. The Course fee of Private Law Colleges and even the National Law Universities is exorbitant and lower as well as middle class students find it very difficult to pursue Bachelor of Law with such exorbitant fees structure and that too for 05 years (10 semesters)."
The PIL said that the students not only pay too much but also lose too much of their precious time due to such a lengthy course.