Supreme Court Plans To Constitute Committee Led By Former SC Judge For Electoral Reforms In SCBA

The Supreme Court today(February 17) orally remarked that it would constitute a committee led by former judge of the Supreme Court, comprising two senior advocates (one male and female each), two advocates on record (male and female each) and one experienced advocate for suggesting reforms for the elections in the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA)

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan was hearing an intervention application filed by Senior Advocate Vikas Singh suggesting some reforms to the SCBA. One of the reforms, as mentioned by him today, relates to who could contest the election of the SCBA's President. As per his suggestion, the candidate must have at least 100 lead appearances in the Supreme Court.

At this juncture, Justice Kant expressed that constituting a committee which could prepare draft Rules and submit a report to the Court would be the better way to go forward. Justice Kant said: "We think of constituting a committee of three-four [members] who do not indulge in election politics. Like Mr. Sibal has to be excluded, Mr. Vikas Singh has to be excluded...We need some five names...We will think of some names..."

This was readily accepted by Senior Advocate and President of SCBA, Kapil Sibal, and Singh. Sibal said: "May I suggest another thing? Learned judge may be associated."

While Justice Kant after discussing with Justice Viswanathan stated that they decided on two names of the former judges and the bench will try to persuade them to be a part of the Committee, subject to their availability. Justice Kant said: "We have shortlisted two former judges. We can request them and we will try to persuade at least one of them. Both have spent entire life in Bar. We can request them to accept this responsibility. We will ask them to have advocates of their choice..."

Justice Viswanathan added that that it should be left to the former judges to decide the names of the other members and only the categories of persons shall be specified. 

The Court did not pass any order. 

After this, the Court kept the matter to be heard on March 3, where names suggested by the various counsels will be considered. 

Case Details: SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION v. B.D. KAUSHIK., Diary No. 13992-2023