KOCHI: The Kerala High Court has held that a registered homoeopathy practitioner can be denied permission to enrol as an advocate unless the registration as a medical practitioner is cancelled.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas issued the order while dismissing a petition filed by T M Manju, a practising homoeopath, challenging the decision of the Bar Council denying her permission to enrol as an advocate.
The court observed that a professional cannot share his or her allegiance with another profession. Such divided loyalty, it said, can compromise the values of each profession and even result in having to serve two “masters” simultaneously. Splitting one’s professional soul between two masters can lead to a loss of focus in both professions, the court observed.
It noted that such divided loyalty cannot be countenanced in the legal profession, which has often been described as a “jealous mistress”. Bar councils, the court observed, are institutions established not only to ensure professional excellence but also to identify and weed out elements unsuitable for the profession.
While practising as a homoeopath, the petitioner decided to pursue a law degree. After cancelling the licence issued by the local authority to run her homoeopathic clinic, she underwent a three-year unitary LLB course from 2022 to 2025. After obtaining her law degree and clearing the All India Bar Examination, the petitioner applied to the Bar Council of Kerala (BCK) on November 17, 2025, seeking enrolment as an advocate.
She was subsequently directed to appear before the Bar Council on December 13, 2025, for physical verification of documents. During verification, officials noticed that a cancellation certificate relating to her registration as a homoeopath was not uploaded.
Following this, she was informed to upload the document.The petitioner later filed an affidavit stating that she had not practised homoeopathy from the date of cancellation of her clinic’s licence. She also submitted an undertaking stating that she would not simultaneously engage in the medical profession and that, if she chose to resume medical practice, she would inform the Bar Council and suspend her enrolment as an advocate.
However, the Bar Council of Kerala (BCK) denied her permission to enrol as an advocate. According to BCK, the petitioner had specifically stated that cancelling her registration as a homoeopath would make it difficult for her to return to the medical profession in the future. Therefore, she had expressed reservations about cancelling her medical registration, it said.
Though the petitioner had submitted an undertaking in accordance with the rules, the BCK argued that the Bar Council of Kerala Rules clearly state that a person already engaged in another profession is not qualified to be admitted as an advocate.
BCK further submitted that if the petitioner no longer wished to pursue medical practice as a homoeopath, nothing prevented her from cancelling the registration, as she could re-register as a medical practitioner after discontinuing any other profession.
