The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to interfere with the ongoing election process of the Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association, Jabalpur, observing that the provisional voter list is only the first stage of the election exercise and that objections raised by members must be considered before the final list is published.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by advocate Alok Kumar Gupta, who intends to contest the Bar Association election for the 2026-2028 term. He challenged the provisional voter list published on July 10, 2026, alleging that it contained the names of deceased advocates, non-practising advocates and persons allegedly associated with more than one Bar Association.
He also argued that the Association had failed to appoint a Returning Officer within the time prescribed under its bye-laws and sought fresh preparation of the voter list along with implementation of the "One Bar One Vote" principle.
Court's Observations
A Division Bench comprising Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Vinay Saraf noted that the election process had only reached the stage of publication of the provisional voter list. The Court explained that such a list is issued specifically to invite objections and suggestions from members before a final voter list is prepared.
The Bench observed,
“The provisional voter list is always issued for the purpose of inviting the objections and suggestions on the voter list,” adding that the Returning Officer is expected to examine all objections, verify the relevant material and finalize the voter list in accordance with the applicable rules and the Association's bye-laws.
The judges also found that the petitioner's concerns were based on an apprehension that the election would not be conducted fairly. The Court held that past instances, where objections were allegedly ignored, could not by themselves justify interference in the present election process.
Court's Decision
Declining to halt the election process, the High Court emphasized that judicial interference in Bar Association elections should remain minimal. It expressed confidence that the office-bearers, Returning Officer and election officials would follow the applicable rules, regulations and bye-laws.
The Bench clarified that the petitioner remains free to submit objections to the provisional voter list. It directed that if such objections are filed, the Returning Officer must decide them by passing a reasoned speaking order before proceeding further with the election.
With these observations, the writ petition was disposed of.
Case Details
Case Title: Alok Kumar Gupta v. State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 28211 of 2026
Judge: Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Vinay Saraf
Decision Date: 17 July 2026
