Today, On 4th September, former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) filed a plea in the Supreme Court, seeking clarification regarding the voter list for the bar association’s elections. The petition raises concerns about discrepancies or ambiguities in the existing voter list, which could impact the fairness of the upcoming elections.
New Delhi: Senior advocate Adish C. Aggarwala, who expressed opposition to SCBA President Kapil Sibal regarding a resolution on the Kolkata rape and murder case, approached the Supreme Court on Wednesday seeking clarification on eligibility to sign resolutions following the preparation of a new voter list for the bar association this year.
Aggarwala, a former SCBA president, stated that he, along with several SCBA members, is filing a no-confidence motion against Sibal and requires the Supreme Court’s guidance on which voter list should be considered valid for this purpose.
Read Also: 161 Bar Association Members asked for SCBA President’s Removal Over Farmers’ Protest
The SCBA resolution, issued by its president Kapil Sibal concerning the rape and murder of a junior doctor at Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College, sparked controversy. Rival bar leaders have voiced several objections, notably accusing Sibal of releasing the resolution “without convening any virtual or physical meeting of the SCBA’s executive committee.”
The resolution, dated August 21, acknowledged the concern raised by the Supreme Court bench led by the Chief Justice of India.
It stated,
“The SCBA endorses the historic steps taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India to address these concerns, especially steps taken to put in place a policy framework along with protocols to prevent the recurrence of such barbaric incidents. What happened in RG Kar Medical College and Hospital is symptomatic of the malaise.”
In response, Aggarwala wrote to Sibal, who represented the West Bengal government in the case, urging him to withdraw the resolution.
Aggarwala further claimed that multiple elected members of the SCBA executive committee sent a letter to Sibal,
“Strongly objecting to the issuance of the alleged resolution dated August 21, on SCBA letterhead and on behalf of the entire executive committee, without presenting it to or consulting any member of the executive committee.”
He warned that if the resolution was not retracted, a no-confidence motion would be filed against Sibal within the SCBA.
On Wednesday, Aggarwala submitted an interim application in an ongoing SCBA matter from 2003, seeking clarification on a previous Supreme Court order.
On March 4, a Supreme Court bench led by Justice Surya Kant addressed the issue concerning the Special General Body Meeting (SGBM) of the SCBA.
The court stated,
“We are prima facie satisfied that all those members who are eligible to contest and vote in the elections in terms of Rule…, shall be eligible to be invited and participate in the Special General Meeting (SGM) to be convened under Rule 22 of these Rules…”.
In his plea, Aggarwala argued,
“To date, Kapil Sibal, senior advocate and president of SCBA, has not taken any positive steps towards restoring the members’ trust in the integrity and credibility of the SCBA.”
He added,
“In light of the above circumstances, the majority of SCBA members have lost confidence in Sibal’s leadership. Therefore, the applicant, along with esteemed members, is moving a no-confidence motion against Sibal.”
The petition also emphasized that to ensure a valid representation or requisition during the SGM, it must comply with the March 4 Supreme Court guidelines.
The plea further noted,
“Following that order, a new voter list was prepared for the May 16, 2024, elections for SCBA office bearers. This has created ambiguity regarding who is eligible to sign the representations or requisitions, as members listed on the 2023 voter list but absent from the 2024 list may not qualify.”
It urged the bench to clarify the eligibility criteria for signing representations or participating in the SGM after the 2024 SCBA elections.