With reference to India, consider the following statements : 1. Government law officers and legal firms are recognised as advocates, but corporate lawyers and patent attorneys are excluded from recognition as advocates. 2. Bar Councils have the power to lay down the rules relating to legal education and recognition of law colleges. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

Contains an explicit test-item statement asserting (but not proving) that 'Government law officers and legal firms are recognised as advocates...' — showing this is a contested/asked point in standard sources.

A student could treat this as a hypothesis and check statutory/roll-enrolment criteria or authoritative Q&A (e.g., official BCI rules) to verify whether government law officers meet those criteria.

Defines 'Advocates' as persons whose names are entered on the roll of any State Bar Council under the Advocates Act, 1961.

One could check whether government law officers (Attorney-General, Advocate-General, government pleaders) are enrolled on State Bar Council rolls or are exempted, to infer recognition as 'advocates'.

States that the Advocates Act, 1961 provides for creation of the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils — locating statutory machinery for recognition/registration of advocates.

Use this to focus research on BCI/SBC rules under the Advocates Act to see how 'recognition' is conferred and whether government law officers are included.

Explains that 'Senior Advocate' is a designation under the Advocates Act, showing that the Act governs professional statuses and designations among lawyers.

A student could examine whether government law officers can be designated (or must be enrolled as advocates) to hold such titles or perform advocacy functions.

Notes the Advocates Act provides for establishment of State Bar Councils (SBCs) for each state — indicating state-level control over enrolment/recognition.

One could inspect SBC rules or roll entries in specific states to see if holders of government law offices are entered as advocates or treated differently.

Defines 'Advocates' as those whose names are entered on the roll of any State Bar Council under the Advocates Act, 1961 (implying an entry-based, person-specific recognition).

A student could combine this with the fact that firms are legal entities (not individuals) to question whether a firm can have a 'name on the roll' the way an individual advocate does.

Describes 'Senior Advocate' as an advocate designated under the Advocates Act, 1961 — showing the Act contemplates individual designations and statuses for advocates.

Use the pattern that the Act provides for individual statuses (e.g., 'Senior Advocate') to infer that recognition mechanisms are person-focused, not firm-focused.

States the Advocates Act, 1961 provides for establishment of State Bar Councils — the institutional mechanism that maintains rolls and regulates advocates under the Act.

A student could check whether State Bar Councils register firms or only individuals, using the Councils' role as the registering authority.

Contains an exam-style statement that explicitly claims 'legal firms are recognised as advocates' as a proposition to be judged, indicating this is a debated/tested interpretation of the Act.

A student could treat this as an explicit alternative hypothesis and seek primary text or rules to confirm or refute whether 'legal firms' appear in statutory lists of recognised advocates.

Discusses offices like the Advocate-General as persons (highest law officer in the state), reinforcing that many legal recognitions under law are person-specific roles.

Combine this general pattern (legal offices conferred on persons) with the roll-based recognition in snippet 4 to argue firms are unlikely to be 'advocates' in the same statutory sense.

Defines 'Advocates' as those whose names are entered on the roll of any State Bar Council maintained under the Advocates Act, 1961 (i.e., formal enrolment determines advocate status).

A student could check whether patent attorneys are ordinarily enrolled on State Bar Councils or whether the Act's enrollment rules implicitly/explicitly exclude them.

Presents a test statement asserting that corporate lawyers and patent attorneys are excluded from recognition as advocates, indicating this is a commonly debated/queried claim about who counts as an advocate.

Use this as a hypothesis to verify against the Advocates Act's definitions and certification/enrolment lists (e.g., State Bar Council rules) to confirm or refute.

Notes that the Advocates Act, 1961 was enacted to provide for creation of the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils — pointing to the institutional source of rules on who is an advocate.

A student could consult the Advocates Act and Bar Council rules (created under this Act) to see whether categories like 'patent attorney' are addressed or excluded.

Explains that specific designations (e.g., 'Senior Advocate') are created under the Advocates Act, showing the Act governs professional statuses and can create or limit legal categories.

One could infer the Act similarly governs who may be recognised as an 'advocate' versus other legal roles, and thus check statutory definitions/eligibility provisions for exclusions.