In a landmark directive aimed at resolving long-standing delays in the elections of state bar councils across India, the Supreme Court on Tuesday mandated that all pending and upcoming polls must be completed in five phases, with the entire exercise concluding by April 30, 2026. The ruling also sought to address persistent concerns regarding fake law degrees and the integrity of the electoral rolls, ensuring that only verified law graduates are eligible to vote.

The bench, led by Chief Justice of India-designate Surya Kant and comprising Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N. Kotiswar Singh, issued a detailed framework for overhauling the election process. It underscored the urgency of restoring the proper functioning of bar councils, some of which have been crippled due to repeated delays, legal disputes, and administrative inaction.

Five-Phase Election Schedule

The Supreme Court laid out a nationwide schedule for bar council elections:

• Phase I: Conclude by January 31, 2026 for 16 State Bar Councils
• Phase II: Conclude by February 28, 2026
• Phase III: Conclude by March 15, 2026
• Phase IV: Conclude by March 31, 2026
• Phase V: Conclude by April 30, 2026

The Court noted that Bihar’s elections have already been concluded, and counting in Chhattisgarh, which is underway, must be completed within a month. States such as Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, and Manipur, where elections are not due, remain outside this timetable.

Judicial Oversight and Appellate Structure

Recognizing the prolonged delays and irregularities in bar council polls, the Supreme Court constituted high-powered election committees, each headed by retired high court judges, to supervise elections regionally. These committees are tasked with overseeing the conduct of polls, addressing grievances, and ensuring adherence to the Court’s schedule.

Above the regional committees, the Court has established a national high-powered supervisory committee comprising a former Supreme Court judge, a former Chief Justice of a high court, and a senior advocate not contesting elections. Importantly, the bench clarified that the decisions of this appellate body will be final and immune from challenge in any civil court or high court, ensuring the process is insulated from protracted litigation.

The Court emphasized that no extensions will be granted under any circumstance, leaving bar councils with little room to delay elections any further. This marks a decisive intervention to clean up the electoral process within the legal profession.

Degree Verification: A Crucial Component

Alongside election timelines, the Supreme Court highlighted the importance of law degree verification. Fake or unverified law degrees have been a recurring concern in bar council elections, and the Court made it clear that verification must proceed in parallel with elections, rather than serving as a reason to stall polls.

Under the Court’s framework:

• Any lawyer who has applied for verification of their law degree will be allowed to vote, subject to consequences if the degree is later found fraudulent.
• Law universities and departments have been directed to deploy special teams headed by senior faculty to authenticate degrees forwarded by state bar councils.
• Institutions may charge fees for verification as per existing rules.

Justice Kant’s bench drew an analogy with delimitation exercises, noting that while verification is essential, it should not impede the democratic exercise of electing bar council representatives.

Standardizing Electoral Process

The Court also laid down fixed timelines for each stage of the election process to prevent further delays. Counting of votes will occur under the supervision of the high-powered committees, and where certain steps have already been completed, the committees may dispense with duplicative procedures.

During the hearing, the Bar Council of India assured the Court of full cooperation in implementing the elections under judicial oversight. Additionally, advocates who raised grievances during the hearing have been allowed a limited windowto approach the newly constituted election committees, ensuring that legitimate concerns are addressed while adhering to the schedule.

Addressing Long-Standing Issues

The Supreme Court’s intervention comes after years of complaints regarding stalled elections, administrative lapses, and lack of transparency in several state bar councils. In some states, elections have been pending for nearly a decade, undermining the representative functioning of the councils.

The bench highlighted that these delays have crippled governance within the legal profession, affecting policy-making, disciplinary actions, and the overall administration of justice within bar councils. By mandating strict timelines and oversight, the Court has sought to restore credibility, accountability, and professionalism in these regulatory bodies.

Implications for the Legal Profession

The decision is expected to bring about a major shift in the electoral landscape of the legal profession. By tying eligibility to verified law degrees, the Court is attempting to ensure that only qualified advocates participate in shaping the leadership of state bar councils. This is likely to curb the entry of fraudulent entrants and strengthen the integrity of the profession.

The judicially mandated oversight structure ensures that high-powered committees and appellate panels will monitor the elections at every stage, from nominations and voter verification to polling and counting. By creating a system insulated from legal challenges, the Court has provided a clear pathway for timely and credible elections, setting a precedent for future governance within professional regulatory bodies.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s directive represents a decisive step toward reforming the electoral processes of state bar councils, addressing long-standing administrative lapses, and restoring confidence in the legal profession’s self-governing institutions. By mandating completion of polls in five phases ending April 30, 2026, and linking eligibility to verified law degrees, the Court has balanced the need for timely elections with the integrity of the profession.

In effect, the ruling not only ends years of electoral delays but also strengthens safeguards against fraudulent entries, ensuring that the bar councils can function effectively and responsibly. As the legal community prepares for this extensive electoral exercise, the focus will now be on compliance with judicially mandated timelines, adherence to verification procedures, and transparent conduct under the supervision of high-powered judicial committees.