The Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated the rule requiring a minimum of three years of legal practice for candidates seeking judicial service roles, overturning its 2002 ruling that allowed fresh law graduates to apply for civil judge (junior division) posts. The decision was delivered by a Bench headed by Chief Justice Bhushan R. Gavai and Justices A.G. Masih and K. Vinod Chandran, in response to a petition by the All India Judges Association seeking a return to stricter eligibility norms to raise the quality of judicial appointments.

Court Cites Concerns from Two-Decade Experience:
Reflecting on the impact of the 2002 ruling, the Bench noted that permitting inexperienced graduates to enter the judiciary had not yielded the desired results. The Court highlighted ongoing issues, including inadequate courtroom understanding and practical knowledge, stating that such recruits often lacked the sensitivity and awareness essential for judicial duties.

The earlier judgment, influenced by the Shetty Commission, had argued that mandatory experience might deter talented candidates. However, new input from High Courts pointed to a widespread lack of practical legal skills among new judges.

Practical Training Now Compulsory:
Emphasising the value of real-world litigation experience, the Court ruled that only practicing advocates can fully grasp the complexities of legal proceedings and justice delivery.

Candidates must now show at least three years of practice from the date of their provisional Bar Council enrollment, not from when they pass the All India Bar Examination (AIBE), to account for variations in exam schedules.

Verification Process and Special Cases:
Applicants must submit a certificate confirming their experience, signed by a lawyer with a minimum of 10 years at the Bar and verified by a principal judicial officer. For those practicing before High Courts or the Supreme Court, the certificate must also be countersigned by a sitting judge.