Supreme Court Calls For Reform Proposals From Bar Associations & Bar Councils On Advocates' Bodies' Functioning

The Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta said that it was not an adversarial litigation and underscored that this is a long-term investment and is important for the institution. “Unless, we start doing something now, how will we succeed? It cannot be magical wand to do everything. From this point of view start giving your suggestions.”

The Bench urged the parties to give their suggestions on issues that are required to be addressed. For this purpose, the Court appointed Advocate Vipin Nair, President of the Supreme Court Advocates-On-Record Association (SCAORA), as the nodal counsel. The advocates' body will in turn request all the bar associations to submit their suggestions within a period of four weeks. These suggestions will be compiled and circulated, as per the Court's order.

The matter, originally pertaining to allegations of discrimination and elitism against the Madras Bar Association, took a new turn when the petitioners stated that they were willing to unconditionally withdraw all allegations. However, the Court issued notice on the petition, to examine the larger issue pertaining to the streamlining of the functioning of the Bar Associations.

Today, at the outset, Senior Advocate S Prabhakaran, for the BCI, submitted that notice has been issued to all the bar associations throughout the country in order to get their response. He added that many associations have certain grievances that have to be looked into. At this, Justice Kant promptly said that the Court is not on the question of grievances and it is only concerned with reforms.

“We know that these are all co-operative societies and…therefore, you do not want reforms also. We understand that part….We are putting a word of caution. If they think that by sitting at home and without responding to us, they will avoid something that we intend to cure then they are certainly mistaken. In the functioning of the High Courts, all judicial system is also being paralysed and sometimes facing impediments and difficulties, we will have to deal with all those things.”

The Court made it clear that this is a pan-India issue and posed a volley of questions. First, what should be the criteria for admitting members into the bar? Second, what should be the criteria for admitting members to the district bars, High Court bars and the Supreme Court? Further, should there be uniform or different criteria?

Following this, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar submitted that it is a question of demand and supply as many lawyers want to be a part of good associations. He also said that the allegation is that there is arbitrariness in admitting and not admitting the members. For this, he suggested that there can be formulation of guidelines for admitting the members.

On the aspect of elections to the bar associations, Justice Kant questioned the amount being spent on the same. The Court also delved into the issue of receiving several complaints over the elections of State Bar Councils and Bar Council of India.

“From where this money is coming? Who is responsible for these kinds of things? Then a lot of complaints and election petitions challenging those elections. So, why not an independent…committee of regulatory body to conduct the elections?”

The Court urged the parties to identify such issues that need to be addressed. It also suggested that one day each can be fixed for the District, High Courts and Supreme Court bar associations. That will ensure one member, one vote., the Court said.

When Senior Advocate Sirajuddin pointed out that in Tamil Nadu a person, having 23 criminal cases registered against him, was selected as a member of the bar, Justice Kant said “Maybe that is the qualification, god knows.”

Advocate Vipin Nair, on behalf of the Supreme Court Advocates-On-Record Association (SCAORA), brought the Court's attention to the infrastructural aspect. The Court agreed and said that suggestions on how the members of the bar lack basic infrastructural facilities and what can be done in that regard.

Besides this, Nair also suggested the appointment of the nodal officer for collating the documents. The Court asked the SCAORA to look into the same for this purpose.

“President of the SCAORA is appointed as the nodal counsel. The SCAORA may request all the bar associations to submit their suggestions within a period of four weeks. The SCAORA will compile those suggestion and will circulate the soft copies…As regard to the State Bar counsel, Mr Prabhakaran, representing the Bar council of India assures that the Bar Council will seek their suggestion and compilation shall be placed before the Court.

The registry is directed to put a notice on the website informing all the High Courts and District Bar associations to submit their suggestions to the President of SCAORA.,” the court ordered while listing the matter for hearing in October.

Case Details: RE: STRENGTHENING AND ENHANCING THE INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTH OF BAR ASSOCIATIONS Versus THE REGISTRAR GENERAL AND ORS., SLP(C) No. 3950/2024