BCI Mulls Action Against SILF Over ‘Misleading’ Remarks on Foreign Law Firms Entry: Tensions Escalate in Legal Fraternity
(Syed Ali Taher Abedi)
New Delhi, June 30 – A fresh wave of confrontation has erupted between the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF), as the BCI announced it is seriously considering issuing a formal notice against SILF over what it calls “misleading and irresponsible” public comments on the entry of foreign law firms into the Indian legal market.
The trigger? A press release issued by SILF on June 28, which questioned the BCI’s intent behind its recent regulatory amendments permitting foreign lawyers and law firms to practice in India in a limited capacity. The BCI has accused SILF of professional misconduct and spreading disinformation for personal and institutional gain.
“Issuing sensational or deceptive press releases in the name of protecting law firms, when in reality aimed at safeguarding private commercial interests, constitutes using the profession for personal or sectional gain, which is strictly prohibited. In light of this, the BCI is seriously considering issuing notice to the individuals responsible for these press releases to explain their conduct. If found guilty, appropriate disciplinary action may be taken, including reprimand, suspension, or even removal from the roll of Advocates. The Bar Council of India is determined to uphold the dignity and integrity of the legal profession and warns that any conduct undermining its statutory mandate will be dealt with firmly and strictly, within the framework of law.”
BCI Accuses SILF of Undermining Regulatory Authority
In a sharply worded statement, the BCI claimed that SILF’s public commentary attempts to distort facts and mislead the legal community and the general public. The Council emphasized that as a statutory body established under the Advocates Act, it holds exclusive constitutional and legal authority to regulate the legal profession in India and is not obligated to conform to the views of any private institution or lobby group.
“The language used by SILF in its press release not only disrespects the mandate of the BCI but borders on professional misconduct,” the Council stated.
“Public sentiment and media feedback overwhelmingly support the BCI’s reforms as necessary to modernize and globalize the Indian legal profession. The continued resistance of this Society, representative of negligible number of law firms is widely seen as an attempt to protect narrow monopolistic interests rather than the welfare of the legal community at large. The BCI will very soon convene a large-scale meeting of all law firms in India, with the aim of strengthening, uniting, and empowering them to better address future challenges and opportunities”
‘Pocket Society’ Representing a Minority Cannot Dictate Policy: BCI
Lashing out at what it called a “pocket society” representing only about 2% of India’s law firms, the BCI said SILF’s stance amounts to shielding the interests of a select few large law firms, who have long benefitted from informal networks and monopolized corporate and arbitration work in the country.
“The characterization by this pocket society (representing only approximately 2% of Indian Law Firms) of big firms as “architects of modern corporate practice” cannot justify perpetual protectionism. It is a well-known fact that almost all the members of SILF have already established foreign offices and informal tie-ups with foreign entities while denying such opportunities to smaller and emerging Indian firms.”
“It is high time India’s legal market sheds its protectionist cloak. Market liberalization is not aimed at dismantling Indian firms but at ensuring fairness and global competitiveness,” the Council emphasized.
BCI Defends Reforms, Hints at Bigger Changes Ahead
The BCI reiterated that the recent amendments were introduced after rigorous legal scrutiny and are in harmony with landmark Supreme Court judgments. The reforms, it said, are part of a broader strategy to modernize the Indian legal profession and integrate it with global best practices.
“The BCI’s 2025 amended Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India have been carefully crafted in line with Supreme Court judgments and after rigorous legal scrutiny. They precisely restrict foreign lawyers to non-litigious advisory work, explicitly prohibiting them from practicing Indian law or appearing before Indian courts and tribunals (Rules 8(2)(b) and 8(2)(c)). The claim of these Regulations being ultra vires is therefore unfounded and without merit.”
In a strong rebuttal to SILF’s assertion that the reforms aim to “demolish Indian law firms,” the BCI countered that its decisions are designed to level the playing field and offer cross-border legal opportunities to small and mid-sized firms as well.
“While multiple discussions took place from 2014 onwards, it is misleading to suggest that the participation of this pocket society equated to veto power over national policy. The Bar Council of India, as a statutory body under the Advocates Act, 1961, is constitutionally and legally mandated to regulate the legal profession in India and is not required to subordinate its vision to the preferences of a self-serving private association.”
The Council also indicated that more sweeping reforms could be on the horizon, including decisions on advertising norms, limited liability partnerships (LLPs), and other enabling measures that would empower Indian law firms to compete on a global stage.
A Call for Collective Consensus
Despite the intensifying friction, the BCI has maintained that it will consider views from law firms across the country before finalizing any long-term regulatory changes.
“We are committed to an inclusive approach that reflects the collective voice of the legal profession, not just the echo chamber of a privileged few,” the Council concluded.
