The Delhi High Court reserved judgment on petitions challenging the Bar Council of Delhi elections after hearing extensive arguments over three days and examining video recordings of the vote-counting process, with the controversy centering on the conduct and fairness of the electoral proceedings.
The Delhi High Court reserved its judgment on a batch of petitions challenging the conduct of the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) elections, which have been mired in controversy since the polling process concluded earlier this year.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Tejas Karia concluded hearings after listening to extensive submissions over three consecutive days, including special sittings held on Saturday and Sunday. The Court also examined video recordings of the vote-counting process before reserving its verdict.
The petitions raise serious allegations regarding the fairness and transparency of the election process, including claims of procedural irregularities during counting and concerns over the handling of ballot papers.
Background of the Bar Council Elections
The Bar Council of Delhi elections were conducted in February 2026 to elect members responsible for governing one of the country’s largest bodies of practicing advocates. To ensure transparency and credibility, retired Delhi High Court judge Justice Talwant Singh was appointed as the Returning Officer and entrusted with supervising the entire electoral exercise. However, even before voting concluded, the elections became the subject of intense controversy due to alleged violations of election rules and the Model Code of Conduct.
ALSO READ: BCD Elections: Supreme Court Refuses To Modify Stay Order On Vote Counting
One of the earliest flashpoints occurred on February 22, when 67 candidates, including two Senior Advocates, were placed under summary suspension for alleged large-scale violations of the Model Code of Conduct and the Election Rules, 2023. In total, suspension notices were issued to 79 lawyers contesting the elections.
The move triggered widespread protests and objections from members of the Bar. Following representations and explanations submitted by the affected candidates, authorities revoked 63 suspension notices on February 23, allowing those candidates to continue participating in the electoral process.
Despite the partial rollback, tensions surrounding the election continued to escalate. The controversy deepened further when the Bar Council of India initiated action against a lawyer accused of misconduct during the election process. The lawyer was placed under interim suspension after allegations surfaced that he had misbehaved with Justice Talwant Singh while the retired judge was conducting inspections based on complaints regarding Model Code violations. The lawyer allegedly attempted to manhandle Justice Singh, incited a crowd of advocates and raised slogans against the election machinery during the inspection.
The incident attracted widespread attention within legal circles and raised concerns about maintaining discipline during professional body elections. Subsequently, the Bar Council of Delhi took disciplinary action against former Delhi High Court Bar Association President Rajiv Khosla and nine other advocates. The advocates were suspended from the rolls of the Bar Council on allegations that they had “manhandling, pushing and abusing” officials responsible for conducting the elections.
The action further intensified divisions among members of the legal community and contributed to the growing number of legal challenges concerning the election process. Amid the unfolding controversy, another significant development occurred on May 2, when Justice Talwant Singh reportedly addressed a confidential communication to the Supreme Court regarding issues connected to the conduct of the elections. While the contents of the communication have not been publicly disclosed, the development added another dimension to the ongoing dispute and became part of the broader backdrop against which multiple petitions were filed.
The petitions collectively seek judicial scrutiny of various aspects of the election process, including alleged irregularities in polling, counting procedures, disciplinary actions against candidates and the overall administration of the elections.
Extensive Arguments Before the Court
During the proceedings, the Bench heard detailed arguments from several lawyers representing the petitioners, including Rajiv Khosla, Shobha Gupta, Raman Gandhi, Anushka Arora, Dr. Lalit Bhasin, Vaibhav Jain, Nina Gupta and Rudra Vikram Singh.
Appearing for the respondents were senior advocates and counsel T. Singhdev, Priya Hingorani, Sunil Mittal and Peyoosh Kalra, who defended the conduct of the election process and opposed the allegations made by the petitioners.
Apart from oral submissions, the Court also reviewed video footage related to the counting of votes, which has become a central issue in the dispute.
Supreme Court Intervention Led to Special Bench
The matter reached the Delhi High Court after intervention by the Supreme Court of India. On May 18, a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi transferred a series of petitions concerning alleged election irregularities to a specially constituted Bench of the Delhi High Court for an expedited hearing.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Criticises Punjab and Haryana Bar Council Over Bar Election Disputes
The Supreme Court’s intervention came amid growing concerns raised by candidates and members of the legal fraternity regarding the integrity of the counting process.
Particularly significant were allegations that even allegedly tampered ballot papers were being considered during vote counting. Taking note of these concerns, the apex court directed that the counting process remain suspended until the Delhi High Court adjudicates the dispute and delivers its verdict. With arguments now concluded and the Court having examined documentary records as well as video evidence, all eyes are on the Delhi High Court’s forthcoming judgment.
The verdict is expected to have significant implications not only for the validity of the Bar Council of Delhi elections but also for future elections conducted by bar councils and professional legal bodies across the country.
The decision will determine whether the allegations of irregularities warrant judicial intervention and could potentially shape the standards of transparency and accountability governing bar elections in the years ahead.