सं Samvidhan

The Constitution of India

Article 76

Attorney-General for India

Why this exists

The framers wanted the Union Government to have its own top legal adviser, similar to the Attorney-General in England, ensuring high-quality legal counsel from someone of Supreme Court Judge-level competence. Unlike a career civil servant, this role is political-legal, tied to the President's (effectively the government's) confidence, allowing flexibility while maintaining professional standards.

How courts read it

Courts have generally treated the Attorney-General's role as advisory and representative rather than adjudicatory, distinguishing it from judicial office. Judicial discussions (e.g., in cases about the Attorney-General's discretion to grant consent for contempt petitions) have emphasized that while the AG holds a constitutional post 'during pleasure,' the office carries independent professional responsibilities and is not merely a government mouthpiece, especially regarding contempt of court proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act.

Common misconceptions
  • Myth: The Attorney-General is a judge or part of the judiciary.
    Fact: The Attorney-General is a government legal adviser and advocate, not a judge; they don't decide cases, they argue and advise.
  • Myth: The Attorney-General has a fixed term like judges do.
    Fact: Article 76(4) states the Attorney-General serves 'during the pleasure of the President,' meaning there's no fixed term and the President can end the appointment.
  • Myth: The Attorney-General only works for the President personally.
    Fact: The Attorney-General advises and represents the Government of India as a whole, not the President in a personal capacity.