Advocate Moves Supreme Court Challenging BCI's Decision To Supervise State Bar Council Elections

An application has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking directions to restrain the Bar Council of India (BCI) from interfering with or assuming control over the conduct of elections to various State Bar Councils.“the conduct of Bar Council of India strikes at the very root of representative self-governance within the Bar and undermines the democratic character of the State Bar Councils envisaged under Sections 3 and 8 of the Advocates Act, 1961. If the ongoing interference of the Bar Council of India is not immediately restrained, the resultant delay will cause irreparable institutional damage by eroding public confidence in the Bar's self-regulatory framework and rendering the forthcoming elections a mere illusion”, the application states.The application, filed in a writ petition, also seeks a direction to constitute a special committee under Section 8-A of the Advocates Act, 1961, and to authorize the respective Advocates General to oversee and complete the election process.The original writ petition challenges Rule 32 which was added to the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015 in 2023. It contends that the Rule extends the tenure of elected members of the State Bar Councils beyond the period prescribed under the Advocates Act, 1961. The petitioner, Advocate M. Vardhan, has filed the present application in this petition.On September 24, 2025, the Supreme Court directed that elections to all State Bar Councils should be conducted, if not simultaneously, then in a phased manner, and completed by January 31, 2026.In the present application, Vardhan has challenged a communication dated September 25, 2025 issued by the BCI stating that it will constitute committees to supervise the State Bar Council elections.“However, the Bar Council of India, notwithstanding the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in Order dated 24.09.2025, has sought to completely derail the import and purport of the Orders passed by this Hon'ble Court. Further, the Bar Council of India has sought to usurp the powers that are available to the State Bar Councils, which have been conducting the elections in compliance with the rules and regulations until the year 2011”, the plea states.The application submits that by issuing this communication, the BCI arrogated to itself the power to constitute committees or commissions for supervising and conducting State Bar Council elections, including the preparation of electoral rolls and appointment of returning officers and election observers. The application contends that these functions are exclusively vested in the respective State Bar Councils under the Advocates Act, 1961.It is further stated that until 2011, State Bar Council elections were conducted in a time-bound and autonomous manner as contemplated under the Act and Rules. The application contends that the 2015 Verification Rules, framed by the BCI on the basis of unverified allegations regarding “fake lawyers,” and the 2023 amendment to those Rules, derailed this process.The Supreme Court had on April 10, 2023 constituted a committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice Deepak Gupta to oversee verification of advocates' certificates and degrees. The Court had clarified that the constitution of the committee could not be construed as a direction to extend the term of any State Bar Council and that elections could not be deferred on the pretext of incomplete verification.The application claims that, despite this, the BCI amended Rule 32 in June 2023 to mandate that the election process of State Bar Councils would begin only after verification was completed, and that the tenure of incumbent members was extended by two years. According to the application, the amendment benefits incumbent office bearers who continue to hold positions beyond their statutory term, such as BCI Vice-Chairman S. Prabhakaran, who was elected to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry.The application contends that the conduct of the BCI amounts to a deliberate disregard of the Supreme Court's directions and undermines the rule of law and the democratic structure of Bar governance envisaged under Sections 3 and 8 of the Advocates Act, 1961. “it is manifest that the actions of the Bar Council of India are actuated by motives that cannot be ignored. It has therefore become just and necessary for this Hon'ble Court to issue appropriate directions to ensure that there remains no scope whatsoever for interference or deviation in the faithful implementation of the solemn orders of this Hon'ble Court. The repeated acts of commission and omission on the part of the office bearers of the Bar Council of India, who appear habituated to overreaching the authority of this Hon'ble Court despite clear judicial pronouncements, cannot be lightly condoned and call for firm corrective intervention”, the plea further states.The application seeks interim relief restraining the BCI from interfering in or assuming control...

Advocate Moves Supreme Court Challenging BCI's Decision To Supervise State Bar Council Elections

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

Advocate Moves Supreme Court Challenging BCI's Decision To Supervise State Bar Council Elections

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers