The Bar Council of India (BCI) has formally approached the Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant, expressing strong concern over what it described as “baseless and reckless” oral remarks made by a single judge of the Kerala High Court during a hearing related to State Bar Council elections.
In a detailed letter dated January 26, 2026, the BCI said the observations were made despite clear and binding directions of the Supreme Court restraining High Courts from entertaining election-related disputes concerning Bar Council elections. The letter was written by BCI Chairman and Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra.
Read Also:- Ganja Seizure Case: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail Over Violations in NDPS Procedure
Background of the Issue
The controversy arose during a challenge to the nomination fee prescribed for State Bar Council elections. According to the Bar Council of India, the matter fell squarely within a framework already approved by the Supreme Court, and therefore, any intervention by a High Court was legally unwarranted.
The BCI pointed out that the apex court had earlier laid down a comprehensive mechanism governing Bar Council elections, including the role of High Powered Committees constituted under its supervision. Once that framework was in place, lower courts were expected to refrain from interference.
BCI Raises Concern Over Judicial Remarks
In its communication to the Chief Justice, the Bar Council said the remarks made by the Kerala High Court judge went beyond the scope of the case and cast unfair aspersions on the functioning of the Bar Council of India.
“The observations risk disturbing the delicate constitutional balance between the Bar and the Bench,” the letter stated, adding that restraint shown by the Bar should not be mistaken for weakness.
The Council also emphasized that it has consistently acted with responsibility and dignity, often choosing silence even in difficult situations to preserve public confidence in the judiciary.
Clarification on Nomination Fees and Finances
The BCI clarified that the nomination fee collected during State Bar Council elections does not go to the Bar Council of India. Instead, the amount is retained entirely by the respective State Bar Councils.
It further noted that the fee structure, including the ₹1.25 lakh nomination fee, had already been placed before and approved by the Supreme Court. As such, entertaining challenges to it at the High Court level was contrary to settled judicial directions.
The letter also highlighted that the Bar Council incurs substantial expenses-exceeding ₹20 crore-for conducting elections under the supervision of committees headed by former High Court judges. These costs, the BCI said, are borne entirely by the legal fraternity without any government assistance.
The Bar Council cautioned that repeated and unsubstantiated criticism could damage institutional harmony. While reiterating its respect for the judiciary, it made clear that continued attacks on elected bodies of advocates would leave it with no option but to consider lawful collective action.
“If such attacks persist, the Council cannot remain a silent spectator,” the letter warned, noting that continued erosion of mutual respect could lead to serious institutional consequences.
Read Also:- Arrest Illegal for Not Telling Reasons: Tripura High Court Grants Bail in NDPS Case
Request to the Chief Justice
The BCI urged the Chief Justice of India to issue appropriate directions to ensure that election-related matters remain confined to the mechanism already approved by the Supreme Court. It also sought judicial restraint to prevent avoidable conflicts between constitutional institutions.
The letter concluded by reaffirming the Bar Council’s commitment to upholding the dignity of the judiciary and maintaining a balanced relationship between the Bar and the Bench, while firmly standing by the autonomy of elected professional bodies.
Case Title: Bar Council of India vs Observations of Kerala High Court
Decision Date: January 26, 2026
