BCI Rule Disqualifying Advocates With Two Or More Pending Criminal Cases From Elections Challenged In Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has sought responses from the BCI and the Bar Council of Telangana in a plea challenging the BCI Rule of 2023, which disqualifies advocates from contesting Bar Council Elections if they have two or more serious criminal cases pending against them. The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi agreed to consider the matter.The plea challenges the constitutionality of Rule 4 of Bar Council of India Rules (for Qualification/Disqualification and procedure for election and code of conduct for the elections of S.B.C/B.C.I.), 2023The impugned Rule states : "An Advocate, for being a Member of any Bar Council should not have been punished by any Disciplinary Committee and/or should not be a convict. A candidate shall be ineligible for election if, as of a date not later than nine months prior to the election, two or more criminal cases of a serious nature (meaning offences punishable with imprisonment of seven years or more) are pending against him or her. For the avoidance of doubt, the pendency of only one such case shall not, by itself, attract this disqualification. There should be no Disciplinary Committee Case pending before 9 months of election against him/her. He/she should be regular in practice and should not be in any other job or occupation. Any Advocate doing work of Handwriting expert or appearing as a witness in support of any litigant, shall not be eligible to be a Member of any Bar Council. Any candidate aggrieved by the decision of the Returning Officer under this rule may approach the concerned Central Election Tribunal of the Bar Council of India within a period of 3 days, and the decision of the Central Election Tribunal shall be final and binding on the Returning Officer."The petition has been filed by an advocate from Telangana whose nomination form for the State Council Elections was rejected by the returning officer because he has previous two previous undisclosed cases pending against him.The rejection was challenged before the High-Powered Election Committee, which upheld the rejection. The petitioner argues that the Rule is against the constitutional principle of 'presumption of innocence'. The bench will now hear the matter on February 20. The following reliefs are sought in the petition : a. Issue an appropriate writ/order/direction declaring that Rule-4(as amended), Chapter-1 of the Bar Council of India Rules (for Qualification / Disqualification and procedure for election arid code of conduct for the elections of S.B.C/B.C.I.)> 2023, as amended by Notification dated 29.10.2025. is unconstitutional, ultra vires, void and unenforceable, to the extent it creates a disqualification based on mere pendency and/or imposes the restrictive remedial regime (including limitation/finality), being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.b. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ/order quashing the Nomination Rejection Order SI. No. 161 dated 03.01.2026 and consequential communication ROC.Ele.No.38 of 2026 dated 04.01.2026, and direct the Respondents to accept the Petitioner's nomination and permit him to contest the ongoing Bar Council of Telangana elections.Sr Advocates Priya Hingorani, Narender Hooda and BS Prasad appeared for the petitioner. The plea was filed with the help of AOR Yannam Narapa ReddyCase Details : SRINIVAS G v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS.| Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).32/2026Read order here

BCI Rule Disqualifying Advocates With Two Or More Pending Criminal Cases From Elections Challenged In Supreme Court

Anmol Kaur Bawa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

BCI Rule Disqualifying Advocates With Two Or More Pending Criminal Cases From Elections Challenged In Supreme Court

Anmol Kaur Bawa

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers