'One Bar, One Vote to Be Strictly Followed', Supreme Court Allows Rajasthan HC Bar Association Elections

Appearing for the bar council, Advocate Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad informed the bench that on receipt of a complaint alleging unfairness and lack of transparency in October of this year, a direction was issued to the state bar council to instruct all the bar associations to produce electoral rolls and then, scrutinise the lists itself. It was further directed that the elections of the High Court bar association, as well as other bar associations in the state, would be held on the same day, as decided by the state bar council. In the meantime, considering the apprehensions expressed in the complaint, the elections of the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association at Jaipur were stayed. "The Division Bench of the High Court that stayed this order, did not at all consider whether there is any subjective satisfaction of the state bar council about the voters who are supposed to cast their votes. What is the hurry?" Prasad submitted.

Justice Shah pointedly asked the respondent who had challenged the bar council's order, "How would the state bar council ensure 'One Person, One Vote' principle is complied with?" In response, the counsel, Abhinav Sharma pointed out that detailed guidelines had already been laid down by the Rajasthan High Court in Rajasthan High Court Advocate's Association, Jodhpur v. Bar Council of Rajasthan [2017 WLC (2) Raj. 526], which subsequently received the imprimatur of the top court in appeal. "As per the directions of the court, among other things, an affidavit has to be filed two days before an election by the voter two days before an election, affirming that they would be contesting and voting only in that particular bar association. If the declaration is found to be false, it would lead to the suspension of the member for three years," he explained. To illustrate, Sharma said, "There are 13,000 members of the Rajasthan Bar Association at Jaipur, out of which only around 5,800 members have filed their affidavits. Therefore, there is an insurance that there are 5,800 genuine voters." "Who will verify this?" asked Justice Shah. A three-member election tribunal has been formed and entrusted with this responsibility pursuant to the directions of the High Court, responded Sharma. The counsel vehemently argued, "It has been two years since the last election. The executive, which has already outlived its tenure, continues to hold their positions for a second year. The election, now, is being stalled by the Bar Council of India at the behest of some members who do not want the election."

After listening to the submissions made by both the counsel, the bench proceeded to pronounce the order. While allowing the elections to be conducted as scheduled, the top court, however, tried to address the apprehensions of the bar council. "There shall not be a breach of the principle of 'One Bar, One Vote' and all precautions shall be made by the election tribunal to ensure that the principle is strictly followed," Justice Shah categorically stated.

Case Title

Bar Council of India v. Prahlad Sharma & Ors. [SLP (C) No. 23009-23011/2022]