Clinical legal education has been described as “a learning environment where students identify, research, and apply knowledge in a setting that replicates, at least in part, the world where it is practised.... It almost inevitably means that the student takes on some aspect of a case and conducts this as it would be conducted in the real world.” It refers to an educational model where students engage in practical, real-world cases. This hands-on learning can take place through a variety of simulation activities that are conducted in law schools. For instance, moot court activity helps students to instil the intricacies of advocacy skills. Similarly, negotiation exercises, client handling exercises, and drafting and pleading exercises can expose students to the complexities of real legal scenarios.

In India, legal education was introduced during British rule, primarily aimed at familiarizing the population with the laws and enactments of the British Empire. Clinical education component in the legal curriculum was presented even before the Advocates Act came into action. At that time, students pursuing law had to complete certain mandatory procedural courses required by the respective State Bar Council and simultaneously undergo training under a senior advocate. But this set-up was problematic because of the absence of coordination between the university-taught subjects and the practical experience in the senior advocate chamber.

To integrate and to uniform the entire legal education, the Bar Council of India developed a fresh curriculum. In this regard, in its recommended curriculum, the Bar Council of India has time to time, highlighted the importance of how a professional degree is different from other forms of education. During this time, after lots of debate, which began during a 1977 National Seminar on Legal Education at Bombay, the Bar Council of India (BCI) finalised the introduction of the new 5-year course from July 1982, open to students after 10+2.

The rules introduced by the Council in June 1982 under the Advocates Act, 1962, emphasised the importance of the dissemination of legal knowledge for the promotion of democracy. The Council also exhorted universities to develop ways to incorporate clinical education. Under the BCI Rules of Legal Education, 2008, greater emphasis has been placed on clinical education within law school curricula. According to Schedule II of the Rules, under Academic Standards and Courses to be Studied, Papers 21 to 24 are designated as compulsory clinical courses:

Drafting, Pleading, and Conveyancing: This course covers principles of drafting, civil plaints, criminal complaints, PIL and writ petition drafting, and conveyancing.
Professional Ethics and Professional Accounting System: This includes Professional Ethics, Accountancy for Lawyers, and Bar-Bench Relations. The course should be delivered through simulation exercises and with the assistance of practising lawyers or retired judges.
Alternate Dispute Resolution: The curriculum includes negotiation skills taught through simulation, conciliation skills, arbitration law and practice, international arbitration, and arbitration rules. Senior legal practitioners are expected to conduct the course using simulations and case studies.
Moot Court and Internship: This paper comprises three components—moot court exercises, observation of trials in two cases (one civil and one criminal), and interviewing techniques and pre-trial preparations followed by a viva. Interviewing and pre-trial components require each student to observe two client interview sessions at a lawyer’s office or legal aid clinic and document them in a diary.

Further, according to the Schedule III each institution shall establish and run a Legal Aid Clinic under the supervision of a senior faculty member who may administer the clinic run by the final-year students of the institution in cooperation with the legal aid authorities, with a list of voluntary lawyers and other non-government organizations.

In 2020, The Bar Council of India introduced the Legal Education (Post Graduate, Doctoral, Executive, Vocational, Clinical and other Continuing Education) Rules, aimed at strengthening legal education across all levels—undergraduate, postgraduate, legal research, technology and court management, continuing legal education, and professional and clinical skill development (both offline and online). The Rules define clinical legal education as:

“a course on skill learning used in actual court practice and in any judicial proceedings, in reality, virtual or through simulations including any course on alternative dispute resolution skills and technique concerning negotiation, conciliation, mediation and arbitration, run by the Bar Council of India and/or any State Bar Council, and/or University Law School/Faculty/Department with the assistance Senior legal professionals from Bar and the Bench.”

With the introduction of the Legal Education Rules, 2020, the Bar Council of India (BCI) has extended its role into postgraduate legal education and research. This move has sparked concern among legal scholars across the country, many of whom view it as an overreach and a display of unwarranted authority by the BCI. The Rules have been challenged in the Supreme Court of India by students, along with a consortium of National Law Universities.

More recently Bar Council of India passed a circular on the implementation of Legal Education Reforms, mandatory guidelines, norms and rules of legal education It emphasizes the requirement of integrating the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 with legal education. To enhance the quality and effectiveness of legal education, implement steps to provide bilingual education, using both English and the Regional/Bilingual Language as per NEP and Compulsory Integration of Mediation into law school curriculum.

Interestingly, although the BCI Rules provide detailed provisions for clinical education with support from faculty, practising advocates, retired judges, and legal aid clinics, the question remains: how effective are these measures in practice of law to prepare the lawyers? Do these courses truly help bridge the gap between theory and practice?

Legal Aid Clinics are envisioned as vital links between legal education and access to justice, working alongside state legal service authorities. However, the reality often falls short. A study conducted by UNDP India on school-based legal services clinics found that law schools make little drive into informing the surrounding community about the clinic's existence and availability of legal services. When it comes to legal representation, the results are particularly poor—primarily because neither students nor faculty members are permitted to appear in court on behalf of clients. This wide gap has indeed substantially reduced the impact of free legal service offered by the law colleges.

To truly make clinical legal education effective and to prepare students as future legal professionals, the law school should not just deliberate to implement these courses limited to a theoretical approach. Experiential learning should be central to the curriculum. Legal Aid Clinics, in particular, must evolve beyond simple awareness programs or symbolic activities like cleanliness drives. Instead, they should provide students with opportunities to engage with real-life cases and assist marginalized individuals in accessing justice.

Only then can the true purpose and benefit of clinical legal education be realized—through “learning by doing.”

Beyond the Classroom: Is Clinical Legal Education Fulfilling Its Promise?

Our Top Articles