We build informational websites for Indian advocates, law firms, and chambers — clear practice areas, partner profiles, secure client intake, and panel-ready credentials. No ad-style language, no soliciting copy, no outcome promises.
Indian advocates and law firms cannot solicit work or advertise — but you can publish factual, informational content about your firm, your areas of practice, and your partners under the Bar Council of India Rules. Big Helpers builds compliant, professional websites that double as panel-empanelment material and a secure client-intake channel — for ₹35,000 to ₹3 lakh, live in 2-6 weeks.
Templates pitched at lawyers are full of "award-winning", "best in the city", and outcome promises. That's a Rule 36 problem and exposes the firm to disciplinary risk.
Outdated theme, broken contact form, no HTTPS, mobile menu doesn't work. Junior associates and panel evaluators both notice.
Senior partners taking 30 cold calls a week, half from non-target matters. No structured intake, no triage, no record.
Banks, PSUs, and corporates ask for a verifiable firm profile — practice areas, team, registered office, GSTIN, COP numbers. You're stitching it together every time.
Draft agreements, ID proofs, case files flying around personal WhatsApp. Confidentiality, version control, and DPDP all suffer.
Without a clear editorial guideline, well-meaning content edges into testimonials and outcome-claims that are not Bar-Council-safe.
You want a credible online identity, a clean way for prospective clients to reach you, and a place to publish your professional profile.
You need a structured site with practice areas, partner profiles, locations, careers, and a secure intake channel — built with Bar Council compliance in mind.
IP, tax, arbitration, employment, white-collar, family — you need a site that establishes professional depth in a single domain without straying into self-promotion.
Office pages per city, jurisdiction notes, multi-language partner profiles, and a single intake routed to the right office.
You want a clear public face that makes empanelment paperwork straightforward for the firms you instruct.
You're not a law firm, but you're adjacent and need a site that respects the same advertising rules in tone.
Tell us your firm size, office count, and what's on the current site. We'll come back with what's compliant, what isn't, and what a clean rebuild would look like. NDA before we start.
Practice areas described as areas of work, not as sales pitches. Partner profiles as professional CVs, not testimonials. Tone written for peers and panel evaluators, not Google Ads.
We write the first draft of every page within the rules: no soliciting, no comparative claims, no case-result advertising, no testimonials. We hand you a written editorial checklist for future updates.
Structured fields for matter type, jurisdiction, opposing party check, urgency, and document upload. Submissions go to a secure inbox, not a generic info@ address. Honeypot + rate limit.
Optional pre-intake questionnaire that flags potential conflicts before a partner spends time. Saves the firm from awkward conversations.
Each area page explains the type of matters handled, common documents involved, and applicable statutes — useful to a prospective client without crossing into solicitation.
COP number, year of enrolment, bar associations, education, recognised areas of practice, professional memberships, publications. Clean, factual, panel-ready.
Each registered office with address, phone, working hours, jurisdictions handled. Useful for clients and necessary for SEO without resorting to area-specific solicitation.
Client uploads files via a per-matter link. Files land in encrypted storage with audit trail. Replaces the WhatsApp-from-partner workflow.
A place to publish considered comments on judgments, statutes, and policy — written in the voice of a professional, not a marketer. Editorial checklist included.
Drafted to address attorney-client privilege, retention of client data, and DPDP rights. We build the cookie consent and the data-handling notice into the site.
We sit with the managing partner, marketing lead (if any), and a senior associate. Map practice areas, partner roster, offices, and the existing intake mess. We bring the Bar Council Rule 36 and IBC guidelines and we walk through what you can and cannot publish.
Sitemap, draft of one practice-area page, one partner profile, one office page — for the firm to review with your most senior partner. We don't proceed until the tone is signed off in writing.
You see the site every Friday. Real content, real partner photos, real intake form. Course-correct early. WordPress (Astra/GeneratePress + custom) or Next.js depending on team comfort.
Final pass with your most senior partner and (where relevant) your communications counsel. We flag anything that drifts toward solicitation and rewrite it.
DNS cutover, HTTPS, intake routed to the right partner per practice area. We send a private soft-launch link to your panel-empanelment contacts first.
Direct WhatsApp line to a senior engineer. Free fixes for any bug from day-1 scope. Editorial checklist for your team for future content.
Indicative range: ₹35,000 — ₹300,000 (excl. GST). Final estimate after a free 30-min scoping call.
Pvt Ltd since 2008. CIN U72200MP2008PTC021190. We've built sites for advocates, law firms, and adjacent legal-services businesses with a clear understanding of the constraints.
Our first deliverable is a copy guideline derived from BCI Rule 36 and the IBC's restated guidelines. The design follows the constraints, not the other way around.
Hand-over via GitHub from the first commit. No hostage-taking. Any local WordPress or Next.js developer can extend it.
Direct WhatsApp line to a senior engineer for the first 30 days, then to support. No tickets, no queues.
No surprise USD billing. Quote in INR, invoice in INR, GST 18% added. Real Pvt Ltd, not a freelancer.
NDA before discovery. Document-portal designs assume privilege. We don't publish or refer to client matters in this page or our portfolio.
Note: illustrative example — not a specific client engagement.
An example use case: a 14-partner full-service firm with offices in Mumbai, Delhi, and Bengaluru had a 2014-vintage WordPress site with mixed content — some practice descriptions, some near-promotional language, broken intake form, no HTTPS on the document download page. Senior partners were each fielding 5-10 cold calls per week and there was no structured way to triage. Empanelment teams at two PSU clients had asked for a cleaner profile document.
We rebuilt the site over 5 weeks: clean information architecture (firm / practice areas / partners / offices / insights / contact), 22 partner profiles in a uniform format, 11 practice-area pages written as professional resources, structured intake form with conflict-check questionnaire and routing per practice area, a private document-upload portal for active matters, and a print-ready panel-empanelment credentials page exportable to PDF. Tone reviewed by the firm's senior counsel before go-live.
Cold-call load on senior partners dropped meaningfully because the structured intake filtered non-target matters. Two PSU panel applications moved forward in the next quarter using the credentials page as the canonical reference. The firm now publishes one considered insight piece a month within a written editorial checklist. No outcome-promise language anywhere on the site.
Yes. The Bar Council of India explicitly permits informational websites listing the firm's name, address, telephone numbers, areas of practice, and the names and qualifications of its lawyers. What is not permitted is solicitation, advertising, claims of speciality not formally recognised, comparative claims, or publication of case results. Our copy guideline is built directly around these limits.
No. Superlative and comparative claims are exactly what Rule 36 prohibits. We write factual descriptions of areas of practice and qualifications. If a partner is recognised by an external directory, we may neutrally cite that recognition in their profile. The result reads as a professional CV, not as ad copy.
No. Client testimonials are widely understood to fall outside what Bar Council rules permit, and they also raise privilege concerns. We don't include testimonial sections on law-firm sites. We can include neutral, fact-based recognition (rankings, bar associations, panel memberships) on partner profiles.
Generally no. Publishing case-result advertising is treated as soliciting work. Where a firm wishes to comment on a reported judgment as a matter of public legal interest, the insights section is written as professional commentary, not as a self-referential success story. The senior partner's sign-off is part of the editorial workflow.
Because under Indian advocacy rules a law-firm site cannot be designed to solicit clients. We do offer lead-generation websites for non-legal businesses — including legal-tech start-ups that sit outside the BCI framework. For law firms themselves, the right framing is professional online presence and structured intake, not lead generation.
A generic agency will hand you a beautiful site that fails the Rule 36 sniff test. We start with the rules, write the editorial checklist before designing, and have your senior counsel sign off the tone before any code goes live. The aesthetic is the same; the safety is very different.
Mutual NDA before discovery. We don't request access to active client matters. The document-upload portal is designed assuming attorney-client privilege; access logs are kept; data is encrypted at rest. We don't publish or reference client work in our own portfolio.
No — pricing on this page is excluding GST. As a Pvt Ltd we charge 18% GST on the invoice. The full breakdown comes with the proposal.
Talk to a senior engineer in 24 hours — no juniors, no sales reps, no jargon. Just a clear scope, an honest estimate, and a build plan.