Supreme Court Issues Notice On Pleas For 33% Women Reservation In Delhi Bar Bodies, Voices Concerns About Expensive Campaign

The Supreme Court today issued notice on two petitions seeking 33% reservation for women lawyers in Delhi's lawyer bodies viz. Bar Council of Delhi (BCD), Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) and all District Bar Associations.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order and listed the matter on September 25, refusing to stay the Bar elections in the meanwhile.

One of the petitions was filed by Advocate Shobha Gupta, who contends that under­ representation of women in effective posts in BCD and other Bar associations can negatively affect their rights and access to justice as well as detract from the justice system's overall effectiveness.

Specifically seeking directions for 33% reservation in the upcoming Bar Council elections of all Advocate Bars in Delhi, Gupta initially approached the Delhi High Court. But on September 11, the High Court refused to grant interim relief and listed the matter for November 27.

As the Delhi Bar elections are scheduled to be held on October 19, and no interim relief was granted, the petitioners prayers were seemingly rendered infructuous. In this backdrop, the present pleas were filed before the Supreme Court, asserting that process of the elections has commenced with declaration/finalizing voter list.

Today, when the matter was taken up, counsel for petitioners apprised the court that campaigning is going on in full swing and Bar elections may be announced soon. Speaking with regard to Bar Associations, Justice Bhuyan commented,

"Why should there be campaigning? Why should lawyers be campaigning amongst lawyers? They will vote according to their conscience..."

Expressing concern about the expenses incurred during Bar Association elections, Justice Kant added, "We keep on hearing very disturbing news about the expenses in Bar Association Elections...this is not fit for the institution...it's very very unhealthy." The judge further asked what kind of example is being set for the country by leaders of the Bar, when they can't stop such kind of activities during Bar elections.

Be that as it may, taking into account the submissions, notice was issued on the petitions.

Subsequently, counsel for petitioners pressed for relief of stay against Bar elections, saying that the elections may be announced before the next date. But, Justice Kant assured, "if they will announce and elections take place, we can do something about that also".

The judge also expressed that a Coordinate Bench has conveyed that there is no stay on elections, and as such, a contradictory order can't be passed.

Case Title:

(1) ADITI CHAUDHARY Versus BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI AND ORS., Diary No. 42332-2024

(2) SHOBHA GUPTA AND ANR. Versus BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI AND ORS., Diary No. 42644-2024