SCBA Elections : Supreme Court Directs Implementation Of Revised Eligibility Criteria This Year; Raises Term To 2 Years From 2027

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan pronounced the directions after considering recommendations made by the committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice L Nageswara Rao, suggestions received from the SCBA, and independent representations from members of the Bar.

Significantly, the Court increased the tenure of the Executive Committee from one year to two years. However, the Court directed that this reform would take effect from 2027.

The Court further introduced a one-year cooling-off period after completion of a term. This provision too would become operational after implementation of the revised tenure structure.

In April, the Court had directed the Election Committee to ensure that the entire election process is completed, including declaration of results, by 5^th August, 2026.

Today, the Court granted one additional month for conducting the SCBA elections to facilitate implementation of the reforms, except the increase in EC's tenure.

Eligibility To Vote

The Court held that advocates would be eligible to vote if they had made at least 50 appearances in the Supreme Court during the preceding two years.

Women advocates would be eligible with 30 appearances in the same period, while advocates with disabilities would require five appearances.

At least 75% of the required appearances must be physical, while up to 25% could be virtual, with appearances to be verified through court records and orders.

Virtual appearances must be separately marked on the Supreme Court portal, and the portal would have to be modified accordingly.

Proximity card entries can be used only as corroborative evidence and not as the sole basis for establishing eligibility.

For Advocates-on-Record (AORs), those with an average of 20 filings per year during the preceding two years would be eligible to vote. Advocates-on-Record with disabilities would require an average of five filings per year during the same period.

The Court also extended voting eligibility to non-AOR members serving on the panel of mediators at the Supreme Court Mediation Centre for two years and having handled 20 mediation cases during that period. Mediators with disabilities would require five mediation cases in two years.

Veteran members holding SCBA membership for more than 25 years are eligible to vote. However, to contest elections, such members must have voted at least once during the immediately preceding five years.

The Court further held that all senior advocates residing within the National Capital Region, including Delhi, Gurugram, Noida, Faridabad and Ghaziabad, would be eligible to vote. The eligibility would also extend to senior advocates designated by the Supreme Court.

The Court held that chamber allotment in the Supreme Court, wait-list status for chamber allotment, empanelment as amicus curiae, use of proximity cards for 60 days in a year, and appearances as government counsel would not independently qualify a member for voting rights.

Eligibility To Contest Elections

The Court held that a candidate for any office must have at least five years of permanent SCBA membership.

For the post of President, a candidate must have ten lead appearances resulting in reported Supreme Court judgments during the preceding ten years. Alternatively, a candidate can qualify through twenty-five reported judgments during the preceding twenty years.

The Court prescribed the same criteria for the post of Vice-President.

For the posts of Secretary, Joint Secretary, Treasurer and Joint Treasurer, candidates must have had fifty appearances in the Supreme Court during the preceding two years.

Candidates for the posts of Senior Executive Member and Executive Member would also be required to satisfy the same appearance-based eligibility conditions.

Contesting candidates would have to furnish refundable security deposits. They would be entitled to refund of the deposit if they secured at least 15% of valid votes polled.

Reservation For Women And Persons With Disabilities

The Court held that the Supreme Court may annually reserve specified posts for women advocates and advocates with disabilities. However, the post of President would remain outside reservation.

Conduct Of Election

The Court directed that the model code of conduct for SCBA elections must contain a specific disqualification provision against inducements.

Any candidate found providing inducements in cash or kind in exchange for votes would not only be disqualified from the ongoing election but also from the next election.

Mobile phones would not be permitted inside polling booths.

Persons convicted and sentenced to imprisonment, or advocates debarred from practice by the Bar Council of India, would be ineligible to contest elections.

The judgment further envisages expenditure limits for candidates and strict enforcement of the model code of conduct.

To improve transparency, the Court directed that a common platform be hosted on the SCBA website where all candidates' manifestos would be published. Members would be given the option to opt out of campaign messages.

Elected office-bearers would also be required to submit self-appraisal reports at the end of their tenure detailing achievements and failures in relation to their election manifestos.

2026 Election Schedule

While some advocates present in the Court sought postponement of elections until complete implementation of the reforms, the Court declined to defer the electoral process indefinitely. It nevertheless granted one additional month to facilitate implementation of the reforms.

The Court directed that, as far as possible, all reforms except the two-year tenure provision should be implemented for the forthcoming election and accordingly extended the election schedule by one month.

Background

The reforms process began in the Supreme Court Bar Association v. BD Kaushik case, where the Supreme Court initiated consideration of structural changes to the SCBA electoral framework.

In February 2025, the Court indicated that it would constitute a committee headed by a former Supreme Court judge to examine possible reforms. Subsequently, former Supreme Court judge Justice L Nageswara Rao agreed to chair the committee tasked with recommending amendments to the SCBA byelaws governing elections.

The committee was asked to suggest norms and parameters for electoral reforms, including eligibility conditions for contesting elections. The Court also invited suggestions from members of the Bar and other stakeholders.

Case Title: Supreme Court Bar Association v. BD Kaushik | Diary No. 13992 of 2023