Court Emphasizes Uniformity in Legal Attire; Says Dress Code Relaxation Is a Policy Matter for Bar Council of India and Government

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India on Monday dismissed a petition that sought relaxation of the official dress code for lawyers during the sweltering summer months. The plea, which proposed the adoption of kurta-pyjama as an alternative to the traditional black coats, white shirts, and band collars, was withdrawn after the Court made it clear that the decision regarding legal attire falls within the purview of the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Union government.

Backdrop of the Case

The petition, filed by an advocate, argued that the current dress code for lawyers, particularly the use of black coats, is uncomfortable and unsuitable for India’s extreme summer temperatures. It was contended that the formal attire, originally based on British colonial traditions, is impractical in modern-day India, where summer temperatures often exceed 40°C (104°F) in several regions. The petitioner sought a more climate-appropriate alternative, advocating for the traditional Indian attire of kurta-pyjama to be permitted as an option for court appearances during the summer.

The plea highlighted the health risks associated with wearing thick black coats in oppressive heat, including the risk of heat strokes. Additionally, the petition underscored that lawyers in different parts of the country face varying weather conditions, making it inequitable to impose a uniform dress code throughout the year.

Supreme Court’s Observations

A bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, while acknowledging the petitioner’s concerns, observed that decisions concerning the dress code of lawyers are not within the judiciary’s domain. The Court stated that any relaxation or modification of the dress code is a policy matter that should be decided by the BCI and the government. The Court remarked, “Weather conditions across the country are diverse, and such decisions must be made by the appropriate authorities after considering various factors.”

The bench further emphasized the importance of maintaining uniformity in legal attire, which serves as a symbol of professionalism and respect in the judiciary. The Court expressed reluctance to interfere in matters that pertain to the professional regulations of the legal community and suggested that the petitioner approach the BCI with his grievance.

Weather Variations and Practical Challenges

The petitioner had argued that a one-size-fits-all dress code does not account for the significant variation in climate across India. While lawyers in northern India face extreme heat during the summer, regions in the south and coastal areas experience high humidity. The petitioner argued that these conditions make the traditional black coat a cumbersome and uncomfortable requirement, leading to health and practical challenges for lawyers.

However, the Court reasoned that while such concerns are legitimate, they do not warrant judicial intervention. The bench observed that professional attire reflects the solemnity and decorum expected in a court of law, and any change to this tradition should be carefully considered by the relevant regulatory bodies.

Bar Council of India’s Stance

The Bar Council of India, which sets the dress code for lawyers, mandates that advocates must wear a white shirt, black coat, and band, along with a black gown in some instances. The BCI’s regulations regarding dress codes are meant to ensure uniformity, professionalism, and equality among all lawyers, regardless of their geographical location or practice area. In previous instances, the BCI has been reluctant to entertain significant changes to the dress code, citing the need to uphold the dignity of the legal profession.

It is worth noting that the BCI had earlier provided some flexibility during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing lawyers to forego the mandatory black gown during virtual hearings. However, the Council has not signaled any intention to amend the dress code for physical court appearances, even in the face of repeated requests for climate-based concessions.

Judicial Precedents and Dress Code Controversies

This is not the first time the question of dress codes for lawyers has come before Indian courts. In earlier cases, the judiciary has consistently upheld the importance of a uniform dress code for lawyers, emphasizing the need for decorum in court proceedings. For example, in the case of Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003), the Supreme Court had upheld the regulation of professional conduct and attire by the BCI, reiterating that such regulations are crucial for the dignity of the legal profession.

Moreover, courts across the world have grappled with the issue of appropriate attire in legal settings, balancing tradition with practical considerations. In some countries, dress codes have been relaxed in response to extreme weather or evolving cultural norms, but such changes have typically been made by legislative or regulatory bodies, not the judiciary.

Conclusion and Implications

The Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the plea and defer the matter to the Bar Council of India signals the judiciary’s unwillingness to interfere in matters of professional regulation, especially when they pertain to the legal profession’s code of conduct. The Court’s stance reaffirms that such policy decisions are best left to the discretion of the BCI and the government, which can consider the practical and symbolic implications of any proposed changes.

For now, lawyers across the country will continue to adhere to the traditional dress code, even as debates about its relevance in a modern, tropical nation persist. Advocates seeking change may need to direct their efforts toward the Bar Council of India, the body that has the authority to address their concerns about the suitability of formal legal attire in India’s varying climatic conditions.

Next Steps for Petitioners

While the Supreme Court has refused to intervene, the petitioner and other like-minded advocates can still approach the Bar Council of India with a formal representation to advocate for changes. Whether the BCI will entertain such proposals and initiate a review of the dress code remains to be seen.

As the legal community continues to evolve, balancing tradition with practicality will remain a key challenge for regulatory bodies. The Supreme Court’s ruling serves as a reminder that while the legal profession is steeped in tradition, changes, if necessary, must be driven by the appropriate legislative and regulatory frameworks rather than the judiciary.