The Legal Education - Law Commission of India

11912.19 Yet another objection is that the student has already spent 5 years atthe college level and his right to make a living should not be postponed byone more year. We do not agree. The student, once he starts practicing inthe court, is dealing with important rights of those who approach the court,such as civil rights or constitutional rights or rights relating to the liberty ofa person accused in a criminal case. A single mistake in drafting a legalnotice may ruin a case or an error in a plaint or written statement mayultimately be the cause for a person losing a case. A single wrongquestion in cross-examination may again be the sole cause for a partylosing a civil case or in his getting convicted in a criminal case. We are ofthe view that the ‘legal profession’ is a profession which is at least asserious as that of a chartered accountant or a medical doctor.Unfortunately, in the last five decades, everybody has come to think that itis easy to pass a law examination, and that whatever be one’s training orknowledge and whatever the means, it is not difficult to attain success inthe profession. It is this attitude that has diluted the quality of theprofession.12.20 We may next refer to another aspect of the matter. In a recentjudgment in All India Judges Assn. vs. Union of India, 2002 (3) Scale 291,the Supreme Court issued a direction that law graduates from college mustbe enabled to directly enter the Judicial service at the lowest level insteadof being required to have a minimum experience of 3 years at the Bar butthat after entering service, they should be given one year’s training.12.21 We have referred to the above judgment of the Supreme Court in thecontext of the question relating to ‘training’. If in some States law