The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh recently observed that the rules dealing with the dress code for women advocates prescribed by the Bar Council of India (BCI) do not say that women lawyers can appear before courts with a face covering..The Court made the observation after a a person who claimed to be the lawyer representing certain litigants appeared with a face cover and turned down the Court's request to remove the cover. This led the Court to seek a report from the Registrar General on whether the relevant rules allow lady advocates to appear with their face covered. After examining the Registrar General's report, Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi on December 13 observed that the rules prescribed by the Bar Council of India (BCI) do not mention any such right. Referring to the rules under Section 49(1) (gg) of Chapter IV (Part VI), of the BCI Rules, which gives details of the permitted dress code for lady advocates, the Court noted,"It is nowhere stated in the rules that any such attire is permissible for appearing before this Court."The Court, however, did not examine the issue in detail after the person in question chose not to appear before the Court further in the case. .On November 27, a person appeared before the High Court, identified herself to be an advocate named Syed Ainain Qadri and informed the Court that she was appearing for the petitioners in a plea to quash a domestic violence case. She appeared before the Court with her face covered although she was wearing an advocate's attire..At the time, the case was before Justice Rahul Bharti. When the Court requested her to remove her face cover, she insisted that it was her fundamental right to appear with her face covered and the Court cannot insist that she remove her face cover.However, the Court did not entertain her appearance as counsel for the petitioners that day, since it could not confirm who she is. "This court does not entertain the appearance of the person identifying herself to be Advocate Ms.Syed Ainain Qadri as counsel for the petitioners as this Court has no basis/occasion to confirm her actual identity both as a person as well as professional," Justice Bharti said in the November 27 order. .The Court proceeded to adjourn the case to another date, while also asking the Registrar General of the Court to confirm if there was any rule which gives women advocates a right to appear with their face covered or to turn down a court's request to remove her face cover. The Registrar General submitted his report on December 5. However, another lawyer stepped in to represent the petitioners later, who Justice Kazmi heard before reserving the case for judgment on December 6. The petition was eventually dismissed on December 13 after the Court found that there was an alternative remedy available. .[Read Orders]
