In a significant move aimed at addressing the financial struggles faced by young advocates, the Supreme Court on Friday directed the creation of a “Young Lawyers’ Professional Assistance Fund” in every state and Union Territory. The court warned that the legal profession risks losing talented individuals if economic hardships continue to force aspiring lawyers to abandon litigation for more financially secure careers.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana observed that the early years of legal practice are often marked by severe financial uncertainty, particularly for first-generation lawyers and those from economically weaker backgrounds. The judges noted that many promising advocates leave the profession before they can establish themselves, creating what the court described as a potential “brain drain” within the legal system.
According to the bench, the initial phase of a lawyer’s career is especially challenging because newcomers do not inherit clients, office infrastructure, legal resources, or a steady source of income. Instead, they spend years observing court proceedings, assisting senior advocates, studying case files, and developing advocacy skills, often while surviving on modest stipends that barely cover basic living expenses.
The court highlighted that these challenges are even more pronounced for lawyers who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and are expected to contribute financially to their families soon after completing their education. Faced with mounting economic pressures, many choose alternative professions that offer immediate financial stability despite their interest in litigation.
The observations came during the hearing of a petition filed by six women advocates—Sarika Tyagi, Seema Vashisth, Asha Jyoti Arya, Bhanu Priya Sharma, Veena Nisar Khan, and Snigdha—who sought improved welfare measures and infrastructure for lawyers across the country.
Recognising the broader challenges confronting the legal profession, the Supreme Court proposed that the assistance fund be administered either by the jurisdictional High Courts or by an autonomous body established jointly by the Union and state governments. The objective would be to provide financial support to young advocates during the most difficult years of their professional journey.
The court also suggested possible funding mechanisms for the scheme. These include structured contributions from senior advocates and other members of the legal fraternity, allocation of a portion of court fees, and directing a share of judicial costs imposed in legal proceedings towards the fund. To encourage donations, the bench recommended incentives such as tax benefits, national honors, and public recognition for contributors.
Under the proposed framework, eligible young lawyers would receive a reasonable monthly stipend while working under experienced advocates and gaining practical courtroom experience. The support would generally continue during the first three years of practice and gradually taper off, ending after six to seven years when the lawyer is expected to become professionally self-reliant.
The court also proposed a sustainable repayment model under which beneficiaries could contribute back to the fund once they achieve financial stability, ensuring support for future generations of young advocates.
Apart from financial assistance, the petition also highlighted the lack of adequate facilities for women lawyers in courts across the country. Addressing the issue, the Supreme Court observed that properly equipped Ladies’ Bar Rooms and essential amenities remain unavailable in many High Courts, district courts, tribunals, commissions, and tehsil courts.
The bench stressed that providing such facilities is not merely an administrative requirement but a matter closely linked to constitutional values of dignity, safety, and equal participation in public life. It emphasized that improving infrastructure for women advocates is essential for creating a more inclusive and equitable legal profession.
Considering the wider implications of the issues raised, the Supreme Court issued notices to all states and Union Territories and sought assistance from Attorney General R. Venkataramani, state advocate generals, and standing counsel representing Union Territories to help formulate a comprehensive framework for lawyer welfare and professional support.
The court’s intervention is being viewed as a major step toward strengthening the legal profession by ensuring that financial hardship does not become a barrier to talent, diversity, and equal opportunity at the Bar.
