Or maybe now she is so well-established in the first world that, as the British would say, she can't be arsed to look for them (i.e., has become lazy). Further evidence of this can be seen in the poor quality of her spelling and grammar and lack of attention to detail: "Baker and McKenzie" = Baker McKenzie, "Latam and Watkins" = Latham & Watkins (damn it, I am completely blind and even I have enough sense to know not to make these mistakes, or to double-check with a google search before hitting send, so what's her problem!?), usage of "is" where she should have used "am". One of these mistakes can be overlooked, but three? And isn't writing on a platform for lawyers and law students by definition supposed to mean that you make sure you are putting your best foot forward? Reminds me of when Trevor Noah was being sarcastic about that scam sign language interprettor the South African government employed; Noah said that scammer "should be a role model to the children" for showing anything is possible. Is this (a sloppy writer, only one level above that situation, in context) the best role model for law students Legally India can produce? If so, pathetic state of affairs!

One recent case for Korean nationals who did BA, llb in India and Delhi high court allows him to practice of law and enrolled as advocate in Delhi bar council now foreign nationality is not bar if you did law from India but if you oci and USA than you have than more strong legal position to practice of law as new notification of MEA .for reference case farting Jung v bar council of India , 2023 sec online del 3269 , decided on 30.05.2023, hope this case helpful for all who are confused about section 24 (1) (a). In the above he has no oci still eligible only ground of duly qualified so oci is more strong legal position because he was some time before became citizen of other countries like USA / uk , he or she was citizen of India or as per notification of oci .

At the time enrollment with state bar council you should be citizen of India but after that you did practice few years and go to abroad and got permanent residence like green card and then became citizenship of that country like USA/U.K. And have oci , as per oci given permission for profession as a doctor/advocate/ c.a./architect etc can do solo practice in their respective field but can not do legal practice on behalf government and government job . Oci is at par as non resident Indian ( NRI)for professional eligibility in the above field.this is notification by MEA. This is also green card for Indian origin in India like green card in USA give permission for employment in USA subject to government job for Indian citizens.

Mataji, some of us are struggling to ensure our immigration statuses in western societies are secure enough that we can keep staying long enough to apply for PR/ILR/Green Card and subsequently citizenship. And this is the biggest anxiety for you? Seriously? You have got your U.S. citizenship, just enjoy life now please! Especially considering the responses you have now received!

A foreign citizen with OCI status can practice law in India. The MEA has brought out notifications in this regard.

https://www.mea.gov.in/images/pdf/2oci-notifi2009.pdf

https://www.mea.gov.in/images/pdf/gazettenotificationonrightsofocicardholdersmarch042021.pdf

Two reasons:

There is no continuing obligation of Indian citizenship for the Sanad or entitlement to practice in Indian courts. Neither in the act nor in the rules.

Further, if you are OCI (as well as PIO) then by virtue of a gazette notification (issued more than a decade back) you are equal to Indian citizen for the purposes of Advocates Act.

In your case the latter is likely to apply, assuming that you would be registered as an OCI.

So chill and apply for your US citizenship. The Indian lawyers using 'Qualified in India' are doing so legally.

On your question: OCIs can be lawyers in India. There is a GOI notification re the same. Get an OCI card after your citizenship change and you should be fine.

But there are a few larger issues:

(i) Indian lawyers can’t be “employed” - Indian law firms structure their contracts in a retainer-ship form to avoid this. Foreign firms don’t (speaking from my personal experience). Most Indians working abroad with firms are also on employment visas. Therefore, such lawyers must per BCI Rules suspend their Indian license.

(ii) Irrespective of the qualification of their lawyers, foreign law firms cannot practice Indian law. Although there isn’t an explicit prohibition (to the best of my knowledge) in the BCI Rules, but foreign law firms risk it not - both from a bar council and a tax perspective. So that US/UK and India dual qualified tag has no practical utility (except for business development).

In theory, I can’t think of any problems in being a US Citizen+OCI advising on Indian law as a solo practitioner in NY. Hope it helps!

Hey,

I am 46 (female) in the process of becoming a US Citizen. I am already a green card holder. I did my LLB from India (Uttar Pradesh) and is a member of Bar Council of Gujarat. I was actually a practicing lawyer in Mumbai for a few years before I left India.

I migrated to the US after marriage, did an LLM and became licensed (Bar License) in New York.

On my profile I always write 'India, New York Qualified Immigration Lawyer'.

Can I legally keep it after I become a US citizen? Is it actually legal to keep it?

Why I am asking - even a person of Indian origin cannot be an advocate in India. Only Indian citizens can be an advocate in India. Once you loose your Indian Citizenship ▮▮▮ are technically ineligible to be an advocate or continue as an advocate.

But - A lot of big city new york law firms (global AM100 law firms) actually have lawyers who did LLB from National Law Universities in India, LLM in the US and still keeping "Qualified in India and New York/California'' despite the fact that many of them became citizens years back.

How could these Indian Lawyers keep -" Qualified in India and US". Despite the fact that they are no longer qualified in India?

I am a small time immigration lawyer, so for me these many technicalities doesn't matter. But for firms like Baker and Mckenzie, Latam and Watkins it really does. How could these firms allow thier indian lawyers to still keep this on thier website?