General Counsel not included under ‘legal practitioner’ definition in BCI’s 2026 draft Advocates Act

The Draft Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2026, released by the Bar Council of India (BCI), has introduced significant changes to the definition of 'legal practitioner'. Unlike its predecessor, the 2025 proposal, which recognized in-house lawyers and General Counsel as legal practitioners, the 2026 draft excludes these professionals from its scope. The revised definition now limits a legal practitioner to an advocate practicing before a court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial body, or a law graduate employed by the government. This shift raises questions about the recognition of non-traditional legal work and the implications for in-house lawyers and General Counsel.

The Draft Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2026, has sparked controversy among legal professionals with its revised definition of 'legal practitioner'. The bill's proposal marks a departure from its predecessor, the Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which had sought to recognize in-house lawyers and General Counsel as legal practitioners. This change is significant, as it potentially affects the status and recognition of non-traditional legal work. The implications of this shift are far-reaching, particularly for in-house lawyers and General Counsel who have come to rely on the previous definition.

The Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025, was a significant development in the evolution of the Indian legal profession. It proposed to redefine 'legal practitioner' to include not only advocates but also law graduates practicing before courts, tribunals, or quasi-judicial forums. The bill also recognized lawyers working in statutory and autonomous bodies, domestic and foreign law firms, and corporate entities as legal practitioners. This expansion of the definition was seen as a step towards recognizing non-traditional legal work and providing greater flexibility for lawyers to practice.

The removal of provisions related to experience certificates issued by private or public organizations also raises questions about the verification process. It is unclear how the concerned Bar Council will verify the authenticity of such certificates if a complaint is received. This lack of clarity may create uncertainty for in-house lawyers and General Counsel who rely on these certificates as prima facie proof of legal practice.

Ultimately, the revised definition in the Draft Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2026, highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of the Indian legal profession. As the profession continues to evolve, it is essential that lawmakers and regulators recognize the changing needs of modern businesses and the role of in-house lawyers and General Counsel within them.