{"id":382281,"date":"2026-04-24T17:30:17","date_gmt":"2026-04-24T12:00:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=382281"},"modified":"2026-04-24T17:51:31","modified_gmt":"2026-04-24T12:21:31","slug":"bci-allows-office-bearers-to-contest-state-bar-elections","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/24\/bci-allows-office-bearers-to-contest-state-bar-elections\/","title":{"rendered":"Can Office-Bearers Contest Bar Council Elections? Inside the BCI Amended Election Rules Approved by the Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

On 21 April 2026, the Bar Council of India (BCI) circulated the amendment to the BCI Uniform Rules (and Guidelines) for the elections of Bar Councils, 2016<\/span>, allowing office-bearers of Bar Associations<\/span> to contest elections to the State Bar Councils<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h2>\n

Prior to the amendment, Chapter III<\/span> of the 2016 Rules imposed a blanket disqualification on office-bearers of Bar Associations, whether operating at the High Court, District Court, or Sub-Divisional level<\/span>, from contesting elections to the State Bar Councils<\/span>. This categorical exclusion generated serious concerns regarding its fairness and constitutional validity<\/span>, particularly considering the principle of equality among advocates<\/span>.<\/p>\n

The restriction was challenged before the Supreme Court in Dhanya Kumar Jain v. Bar Council of India<\/span>. By its order dated 19 February 2026<\/span>, the Supreme Court, while considering the matter at a prima facie stage, observed that the impugned rule appeared to create an artificial and unjustified distinction<\/span> between advocates holding representative positions in Bar Associations and other advocates. The Court found no reasonable or intelligible basis<\/span> for depriving Bar Association office-bearers of their right to contest elections to the State Bar Councils. Consequently, the Bar Council of India was directed to reconsider the provision and effectuate a suitable amendment within one week<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Pursuant to the said direction, the proposed amendment was placed before the Supreme Court in M. Varadhan v. Union of India. Thereafter, by its order dated 20 April 2026<\/span> the Supreme Court approved the revised provisions. The Court held that the grievance of the elected office-bearers stood adequately addressed by the amendment and directed the BCI<\/span> to ensure its immediate publication in the Official Gazette.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more: SC Approves BCI’s Amended Election Rules Allowing Bar Association Office-Bearers to Contest State Bar Council Polls with Post-Selection Choice<\/a><\/p>\n

Key Highlights:<\/h2>\n
    \n
  1. \n

    The Amendment revises the provisions to Chapter III<\/span> of BCI Uniform Rules (and Guidelines) for the elections of Bar Councils, 2016<\/span>, and comes into effect from 21 April 2026<\/span>.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    The revised provisions permit office-bearers of Bar Associations<\/span> to contest elections to the State Bar Councils<\/span>, subject to clearly defined safeguards.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    An advocate who is an office-bearer of any Bar Association is now eligible to contest State Bar Council elections<\/span>, provided that an undertaking<\/span> is submitted at the time of nomination. This undertaking affirms that the advocate will not hold more than one representative post simultaneously.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  4. \n

    At the nomination stage, the candidate must expressly declare that:<\/p>\n