Privileged communication between an advocate and client protects confidential information shared for legal advice. It ensures clients speak freely without fear of disclosure. This privilege applies during professional employment, excludes illegal purposes, and survives even after the advocate-client relationship ends or the client’s death.

The principle of privileged communication between an advocate and their client forms the bedrock of the attorney–client relationship.

This privilege is not a mere procedural formality but a substantive rule of law, entrenched in the legal traditions of both common law and codified systems.

It serves the public interest by encouraging full and frank disclosure from the client to the legal adviser, which is essential for effective legal representation and, ultimately, the administration of justice.

In India, this doctrine has been historically embodied in Sections 126 to 129 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. With the passage of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, these provisions have been updated and restated under Sections 135 to 138.

While the core philosophy remains intact, the legislative language and modern legal context necessitate a fresh examination of this privilege in light of current trends, technological developments, and comparative global practices.

Historical Evolution of Advocate–Client Privilege

The doctrine of legal professional privilege can be traced to the English legal system, which forms the foundation of much of Indian procedural and evidentiary law.

As early as the 16th and 17th centuries, English courts recognized the necessity of confidentiality between a lawyer and client.

The principle was further clarified in the famous case of Greenough v. Gaskell (1833) 1 My & K 98, where Lord Brougham stated:

“The foundation of this privilege is not on the protection of the lawyer, but of the client, so that a man can consult his legal adviser without fear.”

Subsequently, R v. Cox and Railton (1884) established the important exception that privilege would not apply where the communication was intended to further a criminal purpose.

Reception in Indian Law

When the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was enacted by Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, it codified the legal principles of evidence then prevailing in England and incorporated them into Indian statute. Sections 126–129 of the Act enshrined the doctrine of legal professional privilege in Indian law.

Despite India’s own legal traditions predating colonialism, the codification under the Evidence Act brought structure and predictability to legal proceedings. These sections survived various amendments, affirming their central role in protecting legal confidentiality.

The Rationale for Advocate–Client Privilege

At its core, legal professional privilege is driven by public interest. The idea is that the justice system functions best when lawyers can act on full knowledge of the facts, which only occurs when clients feel safe to speak candidly.

Three core rationales underpin this privilege:

1. Encouraging Full Disclosure: Without confidentiality, clients may withhold critical information, undermining legal advice.
2. Promoting Trust: A secure environment ensures that the client–advocate relationship is based on mutual trust and loyalty.
3. Ensuring Fair Trials: Effective legal assistance is a constitutional right under Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution. Privilege is a safeguard for this right.

In sum, privilege is not a shield for illegal acts but a protector of legal integrity and access to justice.

The Statutory Framework under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Let’s examine the key provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which originally governed this doctrine:

Section 126 – Professional Communications

Section 126 provides:

“No barrister, attorney, pleader or vakil shall at any time be permitted, unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his employment as such…”

This section sets the foundation, disallowing advocates from disclosing:

• Communications from the client during employment,
• Contents of documents received professionally, and
• Professional advice rendered.

Exceptions under Section 126:

1. If the communication is made in furtherance of an illegal purpose;
2. If the advocate observes any crime or fraud during employment.

Section 127 – Extension to Clerks and Servants

“The provisions of Section 126 shall apply to interpreters, clerks or servants of the barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil.”

This ensures that support personnel cannot become inadvertent or deliberate conduits for privileged information breaches.

Section 128 – Privilege Not Waived by Volunteering Evidence

“If any party to a suit gives evidence…he shall not be deemed to have consented thereby to such disclosure…”

This section protects privilege even when clients take the stand as witnesses, unless they themselves raise the privileged matter.

Section 129 – Confidential Communications with Legal Advisers

“No one shall be compelled to disclose to the court any confidential communication…unless he offers himself as a witness and refers to such communication as evidence.”

This broadens the privilege to include legal advice obtained for general purposes, not necessarily during litigation.

The Updated Statutory Framework under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

With the enactment of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, India modernized its evidentiary laws. The relevant provisions now appear under Sections 135 to 138, almost verbatim to their predecessors but with refined language and structure.

Section 135 – Professional Communications

This is analogous to old Section 126. It reads:

“No legal practitioner shall at any time be permitted, unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his employment…”

This reaffirms the importance of trust and legal confidentiality in the modern legal system.

Section 136 – Clerks and Interpreters

Just like Section 127 of the 1872 Act, this extends privilege to assistants and other intermediaries.

Section 137 – Non-Waiver of Privilege

Reiterates the safeguard of privilege when the client volunteers testimony without intending to waive confidential protections.

Section 138 – Confidential Legal Advice

This echoes the content of Section 129, preventing courts from compelling disclosure unless the client brings it into question by reference.

Comparative Structure: IEA vs BSA

Scope of Privileged Communication

The doctrine of advocate–client privilege, while fundamental, is not absolute. Its scope is carefully tailored to protect the sanctity of legal consultation while preventing abuse of the shield for illegitimate purposes.

The privilege is not a general confidentiality clause that extends to every interaction between an advocate and their client. Instead, the law recognizes it only when certain qualifying criteria are met.

Under both the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, privilege applies only to communications that meet three essential criteria:

• Professional in nature
• Made during the course of the advocate’s employment
• For the specific purpose of legal advice or representation

Let’s analyze each of these components in depth.

What Qualifies as a Protected Communication?

For a communication to be protected under legal professional privilege, it must satisfy the following cumulative conditions:

1. Legal Relationship Must Exist

The most basic requirement is the existence of a legally recognized advocate–client relationship. This does not necessarily require a formal written contract or ongoing litigation.

Even a single consultation with a licensed legal practitioner, if undertaken for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, can suffice.

The advocate must be:

• Enrolled under the Advocates Act, 1961;
• Entitled to practice before courts;
• Acting in a professional legal capacity at the time of communication.

Communications with individuals not recognized as legal professionals, such as consultants, unregistered legal advisors, paralegals, or even retired judges acting informally, do not attract the privilege.

✅ Illustration: If Mr. X approaches a licensed advocate for advice regarding tax liability, even over a single email or phone call, that communication is privileged.

❌ Counter-illustration: If Mr. X shares the same information with a non-practicing law graduate or a friend who happens to have a law degree but is not enrolled under the Advocates Act, no privilege attaches.

2. Communication Must Be for the Purpose of Legal Advice or Representation

The objective behind the communication must be to seek or provide legal advice. Privilege does not extend to casual conversations, personal exchanges, or matters unrelated to the law.

Privileged communications typically include:

• Legal strategy discussions,
• Risk assessments,
• Interpretation of statutes or contracts,
• Preparation for litigation or compliance,
• Confidential case analysis or recommendations.

The nature of the legal advice can be civil, criminal, corporate, constitutional, or even administrative it is the intent and purpose behind the communication that matters.

✅ Illustration: A client emails their advocate to ask about potential legal liability for breach of contract. This is protected.

❌ Counter-illustration: The same client discusses their vacation plans with the advocate during a casual lunch. This is not protected.

3. Reasonable Expectation of Confidentiality Must Exist

Privilege presupposes that the communication was made in confidence and with an intention of secrecy.

If the conversation was held in public or in the presence of non-essential third parties, the presumption of confidentiality may be lost.

This expectation is judged objectively, would a reasonable person in the client’s position have expected the communication to remain private?

✅ Illustration: A client discloses sensitive documents during a private meeting with their advocate in the advocate’s office. Privilege applies.

❌ Counter-illustration: If the same discussion occurs loudly in a public café, in the presence of friends or media, the confidentiality requirement may be deemed waived.

Practical Examples For Protected Communications

The following types of communication typically qualify as privileged:

• Oral Conversations: E.g., Verbal instructions or disclosures made during a one-on-one meeting in the advocate’s chambers.
• Written Correspondence: Letters, memos, legal opinions, or emails exchanged with the advocate. Even drafts of pleadings or affidavits prepared for client review are protected.
• Electronic Communications: Instant messages, encrypted chats, or videoconference sessions that involve the provision or seeking of legal advice are within the privilege.
• Legal Research and Notes: Documents prepared by the advocate based on confidential client instructions (even if not shared with the client) are protected under the “work product” doctrine in certain jurisdictions and by implication in India.
• Documents Prepared for Legal Use: Like draft contracts, settlement agreements, testamentary instruments (wills, codicils), and replies to legal notices.

✅ Illustration: A client sends a WhatsApp message to their advocate asking for urgent advice on potential arrest. The conversation, being private and for legal advice, is protected.

Grey Areas and Judicial Discretion

Some communications exist in grey zones where privilege may or may not apply, depending on context.

• Pre-Engagement Interactions: Communications made before the formal appointment of an advocate can still be privileged if the client reasonably believed legal advice was being given.
• Client’s Notes and Drafts: If the client prepares notes for their advocate, they may be protected if shared with the intent of obtaining legal advice.
• Third-Party Documents: Documents that originate from third parties (e.g., banks, hospitals) and are merely transmitted to the advocate do not become privileged merely by being routed through the lawyer.
• Group Legal Consultations: In corporate settings, legal advice given to a board or group may be privileged if clearly intended as confidential and legal in nature.

Indian courts have typically taken a narrow view of privilege, requiring a clear link to professional legal services and advising caution in overextending the scope.

When Does Privilege Begin and End?

Legal privilege begins from the moment a client initiates communication with a lawyer for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. It is irrelevant whether the lawyer eventually takes up the case or not.

Importantly, privilege:

• Continues indefinitely, even after the legal issue is resolved;
• Survives the death of the client;
• Remains binding on the advocate, unless expressly waived by the client.

This enduring nature of privilege is critical it ensures that trust, once given, is not betrayed even posthumously.

Broader Implications

The scope of privilege plays a central role in ensuring that:

• Clients feel secure enough to be transparent,
• Lawyers are not caught in ethical dilemmas, and
• The judicial process is not compromised by involuntary disclosures.

It also places a heightened duty on advocates to recognize, protect, and uphold privilege, not only in court but across all forms of communication, especially in the digital era.

Who is a ‘Client’ and Who is an ‘Advocate’?

The statutory framework surrounding privileged communications uses the term “legal practitioner” rather than strictly “advocate.”

This is a deliberate choice, reflecting the historical context in which multiple legal roles such as vakils, pleaders, attorneys, and barristers coexisted within the Indian legal system.

Over time, however, with the unification of the legal profession through the Advocates Act, 1961, the term advocate has acquired a specific and exclusive meaning.

Understanding who qualifies as a “client” and who qualifies as a “legal practitioner” is crucial because the applicability of privilege hinges entirely on the existence of this specific professional relationship.

If either element is missing, communications between the two may not be shielded by law and can potentially be disclosed in legal proceedings.

Who is a Client?

In the context of legal privilege, a client is not merely someone who has entered into a written contract for legal services or paid legal fees. Courts and statutes adopt a more flexible and purposive interpretation.

Under both the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, a client is understood to be any person who approaches a legal practitioner for the purpose of seeking legal advice or representation and who communicates information with an expectation of confidentiality.

Characteristics of a Client:

Initiation of a Professional Relationship:

• A person becomes a client the moment they initiate a relationship by seeking legal advice.
• Formal execution of a vakalatnama or payment of fees is not necessary to invoke privilege.
• Expectation of Confidentiality:
• The client must reasonably believe that the communication is private and is being made for legal advice.

For example, if a person walks into an advocate’s office and begins discussing sensitive matters expecting legal guidance, the advocate is bound by privilege—even if no case is taken up formally.

Communications Made in the Course of Seeking Advice:

• The privilege applies only to communications made in the context of seeking legal counsel.
• If a person shares information with a lawyer in a social setting or in a context unrelated to legal advice, such exchanges are not protected.

Prospective Clients and Privilege:

• Importantly, the law recognizes the notion of prospective clients. This means that privilege extends to initial consultations, even if the client ultimately decides not to retain the advocate.
• This is vital to foster a secure environment for people exploring legal remedies.

Corporate Clients:

• In the case of corporate entities, the privilege belongs to the organization as a legal person, not to individual employees or officers.
• Communications between corporate counsel and employees are protected only if the communication was made in furtherance of legal advice to the corporation.

Third Party Communications:

Communications made to an advocate on behalf of a client, such as by a family member or an agent, may also be considered privileged, provided the communication was authorized and in furtherance of the legal advice sought.

In Balachandra v. State of Maharashtra [1998 Cri LJ 1503], the court held that privilege does not attach to general or casual conversations unless a professional relationship had been clearly initiated.

Similarly, courts have held that privilege is not retroactive, i.e., information disclosed before a client formally seeks legal assistance is not protected.

Who is an Advocate or Legal Practitioner?

The second component essential to privilege is the status of the person receiving the information. Privilege can only be invoked if the recipient of the information is a qualified legal practitioner acting in their professional capacity.

Legal Basis: The Advocates Act, 1961

Section 2(a) of the Advocates Act, 1961 defines an “advocate” as:

“An advocate entered in any roll under the provisions of this Act.”

Only persons enrolled with the State Bar Council and whose names appear on the Bar Council of India’s roll are legally recognized as “advocates” entitled to practice in Indian courts. This legal recognition is a precondition for invoking privilege under Sections 126–129 (IEA) and Sections 135–138 (BSA).

The Term “Legal Practitioner”

The Indian Evidence Act and its successor legislation, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, deliberately use the broader term “legal practitioner”.

Historically, this included:

1. Vakils and Pleaders (pre-Independence terminology),
2. Attorneys (especially in High Courts like Bombay and Calcutta),
3. Barristers (those trained in England),
4. Solicitors (particularly for document-intensive work),
5. Advocates (post-1961 unification of the profession).

After 1961, these distinctions were abolished, and all persons practicing law in courts are now uniformly known as advocates.

Requirements to Qualify as a Privileged Legal Practitioner:

Enrollment Under the Advocates Act:

• The person must be enrolled with a State Bar Council.
• Enrollment alone is insufficient; they must be practicing and functioning in their professional capacity.

Professional Capacity is Key:

• If a lawyer gives advice informally at a social gathering or in a personal capacity (e.g., to a friend or family member), such advice does not qualify for privilege.
• The professional nature of the engagement must be clearly established.

Exclusions: Who is Not Covered:

1. Law students, unless acting under special legal clinics authorized by bar councils, are not covered.
2. Consultants or legal advisors not enrolled as advocates are not covered, even if they provide legal services.
3. Foreign lawyers not licensed to practice in India are not covered under privilege as per Indian law.

Corporate Legal Advisors:

In-house counsel employed by corporations may be covered, but only if they are enrolled advocates and the communication pertains to legal advice, not general business operations.

The Supreme Court has in some cases held that corporate counsels may be treated as advocates, provided their advice pertains to legal rights and liabilities.

Ethical Responsibilities under BCI Rules:

According to the Bar Council of India Rules, especially Chapter II of Part VI (Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette), an advocate:

• Must maintain client confidentiality,
• Cannot disclose client communication even after the case concludes,
• Must not use client disclosures to their own advantage.

Violation of these duties may lead to disciplinary action, suspension, or even disbarment.

What is Not Protected Under Privilege?

• The following communications do not attract protection:
• Communications not made in the course of professional employment.
• If the communication was made in furtherance of an illegal or fraudulent purpose.
• If the lawyer observes a crime or fraud being committed by the client.
• Communications made in the presence of third parties, unless they are interpreters or clerks.
• Non-confidential or public information, even if related to a legal case.

Landmark Cases on Privileged Communication

M. Y. Shareef v. Judges of the Nagpur High Court (AIR 1955 SC 19)

This case emphasized the sanctity of the advocate-client relationship. The Supreme Court highlighted that privilege must be respected not just during litigation, but during all stages of legal consultation.

R. v. Cox and Railton [(1884) 14 QBD 153] (English Law, followed in India)

This remains the guiding case for the fraud/crime exception. Communications in furtherance of illegal objectives are not privileged, even if otherwise confidential.

Siddhartha Vashisht v. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2010) 6 SCC 1] – The Jessica Lal Case

The Supreme Court observed that privilege cannot be invoked to protect material that indicates commission of a crime, especially where disclosure serves the cause of justice.

Balachandra v. State of Maharashtra [1998 Cri LJ 1503]

Held that privilege does not cover communications made before the relationship of advocate–client is established. The lawyer must have been formally retained.

Scope in Pre-Litigation and Post-Litigation Phases

Legal privilege is not confined to the courtroom. It extends to:

• Pre-litigation advice (contract drafting, opinions)
• Negotiations or settlement discussions
• Post-litigation discussions, especially if they relate to appeals or enforcement

Thus, even if the matter never reaches court, if the advice was sought from a qualified advocate in confidence, privilege is applicable.

Extension to Clerks and Interpreters

Sections 127 (IEA) and 136 (BSA) ensure that support staff who assist advocates are equally bound by confidentiality.

For example:

1. A clerk who types a confidential letter for a client,
2. An interpreter helping an advocate understand a client’s language,
3. A legal secretary who handles sensitive case documents,

All are covered under privilege and can’t be compelled to testify about what they observed or heard during their service.

Duration and Continuity of Privilege

Legal professional privilege is perpetual.

This means:

• It continues even after the termination of the advocate-client relationship.
• It persists even after the death of the client.
• It cannot be waived by the advocate unless express consent is provided by the client.

This permanence ensures clients can speak openly without fearing future disclosure.

When is Privilege Waived?

Privilege can be waived under the following circumstances:

1. Express Consent: If the client permits the advocate to disclose the communication.
2. Implied Waiver: When the client refers to legal advice in a legal pleading or evidence.
3. Legal Obligation: When disclosure is mandated by a court order or statutory duty (e.g., money laundering investigations).

However, advocates must tread cautiously, and any uncertainty should be resolved in favor of confidentiality.

Comparative International Practice

• UK: The privilege applies to solicitors and barristers. The “legal advice privilege” and “litigation privilege” are two separate limbs under UK law.
• USA: The attorney–client privilege is a fundamental right under both state and federal law. It includes email and telephonic communications.
• Australia: Known as “client legal privilege” and codified under the Uniform Evidence Acts, it has broader exceptions for public interest and regulatory oversight.
• India: India follows a codified approach, through both the Indian Evidence Act and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, with limited judicial discretion to override privilege.

Exceptions to Advocate–Client Privilege

Though the doctrine of privileged communication is fundamental, it is not absolute. There are crucial exceptions where the law permits or even requires disclosure.

The Crime-Fraud Exception

The most significant and universally accepted exception is where the communication is made:

“In furtherance of any illegal purpose.”

(Section 126, Indian Evidence Act / Section 135, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam)

This exception is rooted in the idea that legal advice should not be weaponized to commit wrongs.

Key Features:

• It applies even if the lawyer is unaware of the illegal intent.
• The crime or fraud must be contemplated or ongoing – past crimes are usually protected.
• Applies to both civil fraud and criminal acts.

Case Law: R v. Cox and Railton (1884) 14 QBD 153

Held that privilege cannot be used as a cloak for fraud or crime. It does not apply if communications are made with a dishonest intent.

Disclosure in the Public Interest

Although not explicitly stated in the Indian statutes, courts may allow disclosure if larger public interests outweigh the individual interest in confidentiality, such as:

1. Prevention of serious harm
2. National security
3. Human rights violations

Statutory Overrides

Under certain legislations like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), Income Tax Act, or Information Technology Act, authorities can demand disclosure under specific conditions, though courts generally tread carefully when privilege is involved.

Professional Ethics and Bar Council of India Rules

The Bar Council of India Rules, framed under Section 49(1)(c) of the Advocates Act, 1961, reinforce the duties of advocates regarding client confidentiality.

Chapter II: Standards of Professional Conduct

Relevant rules:

• Rule 7: Advocates shall not disclose the communications between client and advocate unless compelled by law.
• Rule 15: An advocate must uphold client confidence even after the matter has ended.
• Rule 33: Advocates should not use information acquired from the client against them.

Breach of Privilege = Professional Misconduct

Violation of this duty may lead to:

• Suspension or disbarment from practice,
• Civil liability for damages,
• Criminal liability in some circumstances (e.g., breach of trust).

Privilege and Technology

In the digital era, advocate–client privilege faces novel challenges:

Email and Instant Messaging

Emails, WhatsApp messages, and other forms of digital communication are protected, provided they were exchanged in the course of seeking or rendering legal advice.

However:

• Storing them on cloud servers may pose security risks.
• Use of unauthorized devices or public Wi-Fi may compromise confidentiality.

Data Breaches and Hacking

If a lawyer’s email is hacked or cloud storage is compromised, it raises questions about:

• Responsibility for data protection
• Whether privilege survives third-party leaks
• Whether client consent was implied or explicit for digital sharing

LegalTech and AI Tools

Lawyers using AI-powered document review or chatbots must ensure:

• These platforms comply with data confidentiality standards.
• Clients are informed about the tools being used and give informed consent.

Cloud Storage and Metadata

While cloud-based practice management tools offer convenience, they must be evaluated for:

• Encryption standards
• Jurisdiction of data storage
• Audit trails and access logs

Grey Areas and Controversies

While the law appears clear, practical uncertainties exist:

In-house Counsel and Corporate Lawyers

Are in-house legal communications protected?

In India, privilege applies only if the counsel is enrolled as an advocate and not engaged in a managerial role.

Third-Party Consultants

What if a client consults an accountant or tax advisor alongside the lawyer?

Communications with non-legal professionals are not protected, unless under joint privilege arrangements (not clearly recognized in India).

Cross-Border Disputes

• Indian privilege laws may not apply in foreign jurisdictions.
• Courts in the US and UK may compel disclosure if they do not recognize India’s claim of privilege under their own laws.

Practical Case Studies

Case Study 1: Fraudulent Company Disclosures

A corporate client discloses to their advocate a plan to manipulate financial statements. The advocate, realizing the illegality, cannot claim privilege if summoned by regulators investigating fraud. Under the crime-fraud exception, disclosure is permissible.

Case Study 2: Whistleblowing Employee

An employee who consulted an internal legal counsel regarding company wrongdoing was later terminated. If the lawyer shared that information with the employer, it could constitute breach of privilege if the counsel was acting as a legal adviser and not a managerial employee.

Case Study 3: Hacked Emails in Family Dispute

In a matrimonial case, a spouse presents hacked emails exchanged between the other spouse and their lawyer. The court may disallow such evidence due to a violation of privacy and privilege, even if the content is incriminating.

Safeguards for Lawyers

To ensure protection of privileged data, lawyers should:

• Use encrypted communication platforms.
• Implement confidentiality agreements with staff and third parties.
• Regularly educate clients about digital risks.
• Maintain clear documentation of when privilege is waived or retained.

Constitutional Backdrop of Advocate–Client Privilege in India

Though legal professional privilege is primarily a statutory right under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, it also draws strength from constitutional principles, particularly:

Article 21: Right to Life and Personal Liberty

The right to life and personal liberty includes the right to fair trial and legal representation. Confidential communication between a client and their legal counsel is integral to this right.

Article 22: Right to Counsel

In cases of arrest and detention, Article 22(1) provides:

“No person who is arrested shall be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.”

This guarantees unhindered access to legal advice, which would be meaningless without confidentiality between client and advocate.

Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of Speech and Expression

This article includes the freedom to receive information, which implies that a client must be free to speak openly with their legal advisor, knowing their communications are protected.

Hence, while privilege is not explicitly termed a “fundamental right,” it plays a foundational role in enabling core constitutional guarantees.

International Perspectives

Let’s explore how India’s approach to legal professional privilege compares with that in other common law jurisdictions:

Verdict

The concept of privileged communication between an advocate and his client forms a cornerstone of the Indian legal system, ensuring the sanctity of the attorney–client relationship.

Rooted in common law traditions and codified in Indian statutory law, this principle enables clients to speak freely, knowing their secrets are safe.

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 has largely carried forward the framework of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, with modern linguistic clarity.

However, it still lags behind international practices in handling digital communication, multidisciplinary legal teams, and globalized litigation contexts.

Follow The Legal QnA For More Updates…