Explained: This article explains the political background, key decisions, and possible outcomes related to Explained : Need for restoration of democratic governance and Its Impact and why it matters right now.
A feature of 2026 will be the focus on elections to various Bar Associations and State Bar Councils following a series of Supreme Court mandates aimed at restoring democratic governance and implementing significant electoral reforms and transparency.
The primary reasons for these elections and the current scrutiny include the mandated ‘Restoration of Democratic Governance’. Many State Bar Councils have not held elections for years—in some cases, decades—leading to the intervention of the Supreme Court, which ordered all State Bar Councils to hold elections by a set deadline. The recent rulings specifically targeted states like Telangana, where the court sought completion of elections by January 31 and ensured the end of all unauthorised tenure extensions. It directed that elections to the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana be held by April 30.
30% women’s quota:
A landmark reform in the 2026 election cycle is the Supreme Court’s directive to ensure 30 per cent reservation for women across State Bar Councils. This move aims to address the historically low representation of women in legal leadership.
Can they reduce the fee?
Elections are being held under new guidelines to curb malpractices and ensure fairness. Towards this, the Supreme Court has proposed that elections be overseen by independent panels headed by retired High Court judges to ensure transparency and increase inclusivity. In fact, the court recently ordered a reduction in nomination fee for specially-abled advocates from ₹1.25 lakh to ₹15,000.
One bar One vote:
This principle is strictly enforced to prevent advocates from voting in numerous associations, ensuring that only regular practitioners of a specific court influence its leadership, while BCI rules that were amended late last year bars candidates with two or more serious pending criminal cases from contesting.
Court’s directions:
The high-powered Election Supervisory Committee, headed by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, former judge of the Supreme Court of India, will oversee the process after taking into consideration views of all stakeholders.
The Committee shall consider the viewpoints of the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils before issuing appropriate directions. The 30 per cent reservation for women members shall come into effect from the ensuing elections to the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana. It also requested the Attorney General of India to intervene and assist the court on the issue of enhancing the strength of State Bar Councils. The BCI has been directed to supply a soft copy of the complete paper book and all previous orders to the offices of the Attorney General for India and the Additional Solicitor General. They are to list the main writ petition along with pending interlocutory applications for further hearing on February 6.
Democratic governance:
It is sad that lawyers, who know the Constitution of India and the law, must go to the Supreme Court to restore democratic governance and implement significant electoral reforms in Bar elections. In such a scenario, how can they help in general elections to uphold the democratic governance in India? We need to reform the elections to the Bar Association to uphold the standards of advocates and democratic functioning.
There are many problems that clients face. Do we need ‘reservations’ for the intellectual among wisemen? What are the critical issues in the Telangana Bar Association elections? Similarly, some of the clever clients are causing mischief and sometimes commit scandals. How to stop them. What is the duty of a contesting member of the Central Bar Council and the states? What are the differences between members of the National Bar Council and the State Council? And the difference between the Council and the association. These points need to be pondered and deeply debated.
Supervisory Committee:
. In a writ petition instituted under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, raising issues concerning the functioning of the Bar Councils, transparency in electoral processes, and representation of women advocates in elected bodies.
Regulatory functions:
Elections are fundamental to the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils because these bodies:
(a) Regulate the profession: They set standards for professional conduct and legal education.
(b) Protect rights: They safeguard the privileges and interests of advocates and manage welfare funds.
(c) Disciplinary jurisdiction: Elected members form committees to handle disciplinary matters involving lawyers.
One should raise a poignant point and answer: the “lawyers of the law” needing the Supreme Court’s intervention to uphold their own democratic processes is indeed a paradox.
1. Lawyers and general elections:
Lawyers are the primary “guardians of the Constitution.” Beyond their own Bar, they can uphold democratic governance in general elections by:
Legal literacy: Educating the public on the sanctity of the vote and the implications of the “One bar One vote” principle as a microcosm for “One person One vote.”
Election monitoring: Acting as observers and filing PILs to check electoral malpractices.
Integrity screening: By strictly following the 2025 BCI amendments (disqualifying candidates with serious criminal cases), they set a higher ethical standard that challenges the “criminalization of politics” in general elections.
2. Standards of advocates and client problems:
The restoration of the Bar elections directly impacts clients. A functioning Council ensures:
Accountability: Clients currently suffer when Bar Councils are in “extension mode” because disciplinary committees often become dormant. Timely elections reactivate these committees to hear complaints of misappropriation or professional negligence.
Professionalism: Higher entry barriers and strict ethical codes for Bar contestants (as reiterated this month by the SC) ensure that the leadership consists of individuals who respect the rule of law, ultimately protecting the client from “clever but unscrupulous” practitioners.
3. Reservations and Telangana specifics:
The SC noted that out of 441 elected members across 18 councils, only nine were women (barely two per cent). This isn’t just about “wisdom”; it’s about representation in a profession that governs diverse citizens.
Critical issues in TG:
The January 31 deadline: The SC rejected the Telangana Bar Council’s request for extensions, prioritising the end of unauthorized tenures.
Verification pretexts: The court ruled that “verification of advocates” cannot be used as an excuse to delay polls.
Ethical scrutiny: Cases like Rapolu Bhaskar highlight the issue of candidates with many criminal complaints attempting to contest.
4. Addressing ‘clever’ clients and scandals:
To stop “mischief-making” clients who commit scandals or abuse the legal process:
Section 35 of the Advocates Act: Advocates have a duty to restrain their clients from using unfair practices.
Vexatious litigation Acts: Courts can impose heavy costs on clients who initiate “scandalous” or fraudulent proceedings.
Bar Council Vigilance: A proactive Bar Council can issue guidelines to advocates on identifying and reporting clients who attempt to use the legal machinery for extortion or fraud.
5. Duties of Contesting Members
A member contesting for a seat in the Bar Council (State or Central) has several duties:
Regulatory: Establishing and maintaining standards of professional conduct and etiquette.
Quasi-Judicial: Sitting on disciplinary committees to adjudicate complaints against peers.
Welfare: Managing funds for the benefit of indigent or disabled advocates.
Ethical: Disclosing assets, liabilities, and any pending criminal cases (as per 2025-26 reforms).
(The writer is Advisor, School of Law, Mahindra University, Hyderabad)