Supreme Court flags ‘brain drain’ in legal profession, directs creation of fund for young lawyers

Observing that the legal profession risks “brain drain” if financially strapped young lawyers are forced to give up litigation for careers that offer greater financial stability, the Supreme Court on Friday, June 19, 2026, directed the creation of a “Young Lawyers Professional Assistance Fund” in every State and Union Territory.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana, noted that the early years of legal practice often lead to serious financial difficulties, especially for first-generation lawyers and those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. It noted that many promising young advocates had to leave the profession to continue supporting their families as their “primary source of income.”

“A first-generation young lawyer entering the Bar does not immediately inherit an office, a library, a stable clientele or a predictable source of income. During this developmental period, many junior lawyers remain dependent on modest salaries paid by their seniors or, in some cases, by the local Bar Association, and these salaries are often inadequate to cover even basic living expenses,” the Bench said, adding that the absence of a steady stream of clients and the limited remuneration available in the early years of practice often result in serious financial problems. difficulty.

The apex court passed the directions while hearing a petition filed by a group of six women lawyers seeking improved infrastructure and welfare measures for Bar members across the country. Appearing before the petitioners, senior advocate Monika Gusain noted that young lawyers face many “systemic hurdles and roadblocks” in their early years, including the lack of a stable salary to help them cope with financial uncertainty.

To address these concerns, the top court has called for creation of a fund to be brought under the control of competent High Courts or an autonomous body constituted by the Union and State governments.

“It therefore seems to us that the Young Lawyers Professional Assistance Fund should be constituted and established under the exclusive control of the High Courts having jurisdiction or an autonomous body constituted by the Union of India in consultation with the State Governments. Such a framework would inspire greater confidence among prospective donors and contributors to the Fund,” the Bench said.

‘Self-sustaining fund’

The board also outlined possible funding sources for the proposed program. It has been suggested that Parliament and State legislatures should consider creating a legal framework for structured donations made by successful senior lawyers and other members of the legal community.

In addition, the court recommended that part of the court costs and a significant part of the costs incurred in judicial proceedings be directed to the fund. He suggested tax exemptions, national awards and other forms of recognition for donors to encourage contributions.

The Bench also suggested a “self-sustaining model” for the proposed fund, under which lawyers who received financial aid in their early years of practice would contribute back to the corpus once they achieved financial stability.

. “…such financial assistance may be reduced proportionately over time and may finally cease after 7 years of practice. This will likely coincide with the young lawyer eventually developing self-sufficiency and establishing an independent practice,” the Bench said.

‘Equal participation in public life’

The petition filed by advocates Sarika Tyagi, Seema Vashisth, Asha Jyoti Arya, Bhanu Priya Sharma, Veena Nisar Khan and Snigdha also drew the court’s attention to the lack of adequately equipped Ladies Bar Rooms and other basic facilities in most of the High Courts, district courts, tehsil courts, tribunals and commissions. She argued that the absence of such an infrastructure negatively impacts the ability of women advocates to fulfill their professional responsibilities.

Acknowledging that these concerns cannot be dismissed as a matter of mere “administrative convenience”, the Bench underlined that although the legal profession has witnessed an encouraging increase in women’s participation in the last few decades, meaningful participation requires the creation of infrastructure and support systems that enable women to work on equal terms with their male colleagues.

“The provision of such basic amenities has a prima facie direct link to the fundamental guarantee of life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution…. When women lawyers are required to spend a significant part of their day in court premises, the availability of basic infrastructure necessary for their comfort, privacy, security and professional functioning becomes of utmost importance,” the panel said, adding that the concerns lie “at the very heart of the constitutional guarantee of dignity and equal participation in public life.”

Cognizant of the “wider implications” of the alleged problems, the court issued a notice to all States and Union Territories and requested Solicitor General R. Venkataramani, the State Attorneys General and the standing counsel for the Union Territories to assist it in developing a comprehensive framework. The next hearing of the case will be held on July 17.

It was published – 19 June 2026 15:16 IST