By Prachi Shrivastava | March 30, 2025
Somewhere between the Supreme Court’s of India’s shutdown of Internet platform JustDial’s and Quikr’s lawyer listing pages, and the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) passive-aggressive circulars on “promotional activities” by law firms, the Indian legal profession entered what can only be described as a cold war with modernisation.
The most recent chill came not from courtrooms but from corridors of regulatory opacity. In the wake of DSK Legal’s now-infamous advertisement with Bollywood actor Rahul Bose in the lead, a new BCI circular reminded lawyers—yet again—of the profession’s “ethical obligations” and “dignity”. One might be forgiven for thinking that the greatest threat to professional ethics in India is not poor advocacy, delayed justice, or client mistrust, but a 25-year-old rule that regulates how and when a lawyer may speak of their work.
That rule, of course, is Rule 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules.
And it is quietly, but significantly, crippling the profession.
Rule 36: A Colonial Hangover in the Age of Instagram
Let’s recall the wording: “An advocate shall not solicit work or advertise, either directly or indirectly…”
What began as a modest attempt to prevent ambulance chasing has, over the years, morphed into a black-and-white mandate for a full-colour world.
In its broadest interpretation, Rule 36 has now come to include:
• No digital ads (paid or unpaid);
• No social media posts that look like “marketing”;
• No directory listings (unless controlled); and
• Quite bizarrely, no educational or thought leadership content if it leads to client conversion.
In an age where CA firms, consulting shops, and even bureaucrats actively build personal brands, Indian lawyers are still being asked to look the other way while their clients Google “cheap legal help near me”. In its 2024 Am Law Report, American Lawyer divulged that Kirkland & Ellis reported annual revenue of US$7.2 billion. According to the India Brand Equity Foundation, the country’s legal services industry turned over only a fraction of that amount, namely $1.5-$2.2 million. (excluding unrecorded low-billed court fees).
The Supreme Court Clampdown: What JustDial & Quikr Got Wrong—And Right
In March 2023, citing both Rule 36 and the Advocates Act, the Supreme Court held that platforms like JustDial and Quikr could not allow listing or advertisement of legal professionals.
Their rationale? These platforms provided an unfair commercial advantage to some lawyers, violating the principle of “dignified legal practice”.
Read More
How India’s Lawyers Are Paralysed by Obsolete Advertising Norms
