Supreme Court Restores 3-Year Practice Requirement for Judicial Service: A Step Toward Practical Judicial Competence

Posted on July 1, 2025 | By Sarangi Legal Team

Introduction

In a landmark decision delivered in June 2025, the Supreme Court of India reinstated the rule requiring a minimum of three years of practice at the Bar for candidates applying to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division). The verdict effectively overrules a long-standing policy introduced in 2002, which allowed fresh law graduates to directly enter judicial service. This move is seen as a significant judicial reform aimed at ensuring that candidates appointed to the lower judiciary possess adequate practical courtroom exposure.

Background of the Case

The issue of whether judicial officers should be selected directly from law schools or only after gaining practical experience has long been debated. The 2002 amendment to service rules in various states allowed fresh law graduates with no courtroom experience to appear for judicial service exams. However, this was challenged by various stakeholders including Bar Councils, legal experts, and some High Courts, who argued that theoretical knowledge cannot substitute for real-world advocacy experience.

In the recent judgment, the Supreme Court took note of these concerns and emphasized that a minimum period of legal practice is necessary to build the skillset, temperament, and familiarity with procedural law that a judge must possess.

The Supreme Court’s Observations

The three-judge bench, led by Justice B.R. Gavai, ruled that the practical experience of at least three years is not only desirable but essential for the discharge of judicial functions. The Court underscored that presiding over a court requires more than academic merit — it demands a nuanced understanding of how cases evolve, how litigants behave, and how law is applied in practice.

The Court directed all High Courts and State Governments to bring their recruitment rules in line with this requirement. However, it clarified that this new requirement will not apply to ongoing recruitment processes already advertised or underway.

Legal and Policy Implications

This judgment is likely to reshape the path to the judiciary. Law graduates aspiring to become judges will now be required to spend time at the Bar, gaining advocacy experience, engaging in real-life litigation, and understanding the adversarial system from the ground up.

It may also impact National Law Universities and other legal institutions that previously encouraged students to pursue judicial service examinations immediately after graduation. Legal education will now need to adapt to a more practice-oriented model, preparing students not only for exams but also for professional experience in courtrooms.

Response from Stakeholders

The decision has received wide support from Bar Associations and legal professionals across the country. Many believe it will raise the overall quality of the judiciary by ensuring that judges are more grounded in real-world legal practice. However, a few states, including Sikkim and Chhattisgarh, expressed reservations about the impact on recruitment, particularly in regions where attracting candidates to the judiciary is already challenging.

Looking Ahead: Strengthening the Judicial Ecosystem

While this decision brings long-overdue emphasis on practical experience, it also raises the need to improve internal promotion mechanisms within the judiciary. For example, subordinate court judges should be given more training, exposure, and career growth opportunities to ensure consistent standards across the board.

Furthermore, the verdict implicitly encourages state bar councils and High Courts to develop clear, transparent methods for certifying and verifying legal experience, reducing the possibility of fraudulent claims or bureaucratic hurdles.