Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court on Friday (October 17) refused to entertain a writ petition filed by two advocates challenging the Bar Council of India's (BCI) decision to hike the nomination fee for contesting the State Bar Council Elections to Rs 1,25,000.

After a bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi expressed reluctance to entertain the matter, the petitioners withdrew the matter.

The senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the BCI has exorbitantly increased the fee from Rs 9,000 to Rs 1,25,000. He submitted that blanketly fixing the nomination fee at an exorbitant level, without any connection with the standing of the candidate at the bar, was unreasonable. He suggested that the nomination fee should be in tune with the standing of the bar, as is done in the Supreme Court Bar Association elections.

"BCI is saying it doesn't have enough money," Justice Kant said. The counsel contested this position, saying that the Bar Councils have a lot of funds.

"From 9000 it goes straight to 1,25000. Somebody joining the profession and wanting to contest within 2-3 years will not be able to.." the counsel submitted.

"Let them contest later. What is the tearing hurry for them to contest?" Justice Kant asked. "Your supporters will take care of the amount," Justice Kant said in a lighter vein.

As the bench started to dictate an order dismissing the matter, the petitioners' counsel sought to withdraw the petition. He sought liberty to approach the High Court, saying that some High Courts are considering the issue. However, the bench did not record any such liberty in its order, and the matter was dismissed as liberty.

The petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, challenges the BCI's circular (No. BCI:D:6880/2025(Council-STBC's)) dated September 25, 2025, which fixed the non-refundable nomination fee for candidates at Rs 1,25,000.

"Imposition of condition precedent to deposit exorbitant amount of Rs,1,25,000/- in the name of nomination fee to be eligible to take part in the electoral process whereas poses threat to the fairness in the democratic process on the one hand; it abridges the rights of the citizens of equality and of fair opportunity. Imposition of such a huge sum to be eligible to take part in election not only deprives the voters of level playing field but also curtails the choices of the voters. Such curtailment of the choices of citizens/ voters tantamount to unfairness in the electoral process," stated the petition filed by Advocates Manish Jain and Pradeep Kumar.

The BCI issued the circular pursuant to the Supreme Court's order dated September 24, 2025, in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1319/2023, directing that long-pending State Bar Council elections be completed by January 31, 2026. The BCI subsequently instructed all State Bar Councils to constitute election committees and conduct the polls, while simultaneously revising the nomination fee to the new amount.

The petitioners contend that the justification cited by the BCI, a purported shortage of funds following the Supreme Court's 2024 judgment reducing enrolment fees, cannot be a valid ground for burdening candidates with such a steep nomination charge. The petitioners also refute the claim that State Bar Councils have shortage of funds. In this regard, it is stated that the Bar Council of Delhi alone has about Rs 99 crores, as per data available in the public domain.

Calling the decision “an antithesis to democracy,” the petition asserts that the exorbitant fee would restrict participation to only those with financial means, thereby “promoting the use of money and muscle power” in what should be a fair and representative election. It argues that the measure creates a divide between the “haves” and “have-nots,” undermining equality and the right to fair participation under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

The advocates have urged the Supreme Court to quash the BCI's September 25 circular and direct that the elections be conducted strictly in accordance with the Court's earlier order.

Case : MANISH JAIN Vs BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 1005/2025