SC Approves BCI’s Amended Election Rules Allowing Bar Association Office-Bearers to Contest State Bar Council Polls with Post-Selection Choice

Supreme Court: In a significant development concerning the electoral framework of State Bar Councils, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Surya Kant, CJ., and Joymalya Bagchi, JJ., has approved the amended Chapter III of the Bar Council of India Uniform Rules and Mandatory Guidelines for Elections of Bar Councils, 2016.

Office-bearers of various Bar Associations had challenged Chapter III of the Bar Council of India Uniform Rules and Mandatory Guidelines for Elections of Bar Councils, 2016, which disqualified sitting office-bearers from contesting State Bar Council elections unless they first resigned from their posts. A similar challenge had earlier been raised in W.P. (C) No. 226 of 2026, which was disposed of on 19 February 2026. Subsequently, the Bar Council of India issued an amendment to Chapter III through a Notification dated 11 March 2026. However, Clause 2 of the amendment stipulates that it will come into effect only upon approval of the Court. The amended provisions have accordingly been placed on record along with IA No. 78285 of 2026 in W.P. (C) No. 1319 of 2023 for judicial consideration.

Also Read: Bar Council of India Election Rules 2023 Amended

Chapter III, as amended by the Bar Council of India, on 11 March 2026 reads as follows:

“CHAPTER III

1. Eligibility of office-bearers of Bar Associations to contest election to a State Bar Council.

   1. An advocate who is an office-bearer of a Bar Association shall be eligible to contest the election to a State Bar Council, provided that such advocate files an undertaking before the Returning Officer at the time of filing the nomination stating that, if elected as a member of the State Bar Council, the advocate shall not simultaneously hold more than one representative post and shall accordingly resign as an office-bearer of the Bar Association upon election, or in the alternative shall resign as a member of the State Bar Council if the advocate chooses to continue as an office-bearer of the Bar Association.

   2. If any advocate who holds a position as an office-bearer of a Bar Association is elected as a member of a State Bar Council, such advocate shall, within fifteen days from the date of declaration of results, exercise a written option to retain only one of the representative posts and shall communicate the same to the concerned Bar Association and the concerned State Bar Council.

   3. Upon exercise of such option, the advocate shall relinquish the other post or post held by him or her and shall intimate the same in writing to the concerned Bar Association and the concerned State Bar Council for record and necessary action.

   4. If any advocate elected as a member of a State Bar Council fails to exercise the option and communicate relinquishment in terms of clause (b) within fifteen days from the date of declaration of results, such advocate shall be deemed to have vacated the office of Member of the State Bar Council upon expiry of the said period.

2. Commencement and Applicability

   This amendment shall come into force from the date of its publication in the official gazette of India, after due approval from the Hon’ble Apex Court, and this shall apply to all cases where elections have not yet been held.”

The Court observed that the grievances of elected office-bearers of Bar Associations stood adequately redressed by the amended provisions of Chapter III, and accordingly approving the same, while directing that the amended rules be published in the Official Gazette of India without delay.

Further, on the issue of enforceability of the amended Chapter III in respect of elections to State Bar Councils, the Court clarified that such determination required a case-to-case assessment.

The writ petitions were thus disposed of, with liberty granted to aggrieved parties to approach the High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee headed by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, former Judge of the Supreme Court, for appropriate directions, the Committee being empowered to take decisions or frame necessary guidelines in that regard.

Also Read: BCI condemns, warns against unethical legal advertising by advocates and legal influencers; issues directives

[Shyam Lal Thakur v. Bar Council of India, WP(Civil) No. 454 of 2026, decided on 20-4-2026]

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For Petitioner: Sanjay M Nuli, Sr. Adv., Govind Jee, AOR, Brajesh Pandey & Associates, AOR, Mrigank Prabhakar, AOR, Vikas Upadhyay, AOR, Omanakuttan K K, Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, Sachin Pathak, Ankita Kashyap, Ranveer Singh, Siva N., Siddharth R. Gupta, Astha Singh, Uddaish Palya, Aman Agarwal, Shantanu Sharma, Surbhi Saxena, Samriddhi Rai, Varun Thakur, Ram Karan, Shraddha Saran, Shashank Ratnoo, Vishakha Singh Chauhan, Ajay Kumar Singh Yadav, S.P. Singh, Advocates

For Respondent: Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv., Dr Ram Shankar, Advocate, Ram Shankar & Co., AOR