Disposed

Priya Kumari v. Bar Council of India & Anr.

Delhi HC9 Feb 2026W.P.(C)/1789/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition sought inclusion of a lawyer's name in the final electoral roll for the Delhi Bar Council elections after she passed AIBE-XX but was omitted from the final list. Citing the Supreme Court's M. Varadhan order and this Court's prior Umesh Kumar judgment, the Court disposed of the petition with liberty to approach the Special Committee.

What the court decided

AI extract

Priya Kumari Vs Bar Council of India & Anr. — Election Law | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~34

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1789/2026

¶4

PRIYA KUMARI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satish Sangwan, Mr. Vinod Kumar Mangal, Mr. Nikhil Rastogi, Mr. Kunal Srivastava, Mr. Parvinder Singh, Ms. Tannu Rathee, Mr. Himanshu Mehra & Mr. Kunal Yadav, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Preetpal Singh, Ms. Tanupreet Kaur & Ms.Simran Kukmari, Advocates for R-1. Mr. T. Singhdev, Mr. Tanishq Srivastava, Ms. Yamini Singh, Mr. Abhijit Chakravarty & Mr. Bhanu Gulati, Advocates for R-2.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶8

¶9

O R D E R 09.02.2026

¶10

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent no.1/ Bar Council of India and the respondent no.2/ Bar Council of Delhi to include the name of the petitioner in the electoral roll for the upcoming election of the Bar Council of Delhi to be held from 21^st February, 2026 to 23^rd February, 2026.

¶11

It is contended by counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that

¶12

Page 1 of 3

¶13

W.P.(C) 1789/2026

¶14

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/02/2026 at 11:24:27

¶15

the results of the All-India Bar Examination – XX (AIBE) held on 30^th November, 2025 was declared on 13^th January, 2026 and the petitioner passed the said exam. He further submits that despite her name being included in the tentative voter list, the same has not been included in the final electoral list. The petitioner had approached the Bar Council of Delhi on 22^nd January, 2026 along with her application for inclusion in the electoral roll.

¶16

Mr. T. Singhdev, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2, submits that in terms of the schedule for the Bar Council of Delhi elections, the final electoral list has already been published on 17^th January, 2026 and now, it is too late for inclusion of names of other voters, such as the petitioner.

¶17

He submits that a communication was received from Bar Council of India on 6^th February, 2026 regarding the AIBE results of forty-three (43) candidates, including the petitioner.

¶18

In W.P.(C) 158/2026 titled Umesh Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. , this Court, in its judgment dated 7^th January, 2026, relying upon the observations of the Supreme Court in W.P. (C) 1319/2019 titled M. Varadhan v. Union of India & Anr. , had directed the petitioners therein to file a representation before the Special Committee appointed by the Supreme Court under the said order.

¶19

The relevant extracts from the Judgment of M. Varadhan (supra) are set out below:

¶20

“ 19. During the course of hearing, it is seen that several lawyers have individual and varied grievances. We are afraid such individual grievances cannot be addressed in these proceedings. Liberty is, hence, granted to them to apply before the High-Powered Election Committee(s) for redressal of their individual issue(s).

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

W.P.(C) 1789/2026

¶23

¶24

20. Any person who is aggrieved by the decision of the High Powered Election Committee shall be at liberty to approach the High-Powered Supervisory Committee. The decision taken by the Supervisory Committee shall be final. No civil court or High Court shall entertain any petition(s) against such decision. ”

¶25

[emphasis supplied]

¶26

The relevant extracts from the judgment of this Court, passed in Umesh Kumar (supra) on 7^th January, 2026 are set out below:

¶27

“8. A perusal of the aforesaid order passed by the Supreme Court shows that to conduct the elections to the Bar Council of Delhi, a Special Committee has been constituted.

¶28

9. A perusal of paragraph 19 of the aforesaid order passed by the Supreme Court also demonstrates that in case of any grievance by any individual with regard to elections or any other issues, such an individual may approach the High-Powered Election Committee which, in case of Delhi, is the Special Committee itself.

¶29

10. The aforesaid order also provides that any aggrieved person may challenge a decision of the High-Powered Election Committee/ Special Committee before the High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee and no civil court or high court shall have the power to entertain any petition against such decision.”

¶30

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of while giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Special Committee, who shall consider the same.

AMIT BANSAL, J

FEBRUARY 9, 2026

Page 3 of 3

W.P.(C) 1789/2026

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/02/2026 at 11:24:27

Priya Kumari v. Bar Council of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Priya Kumari v. Bar Council of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuj Vs Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board

Sri Saudan Singh Institute of Higher Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Chandrabali Singh Urmila Mahavidyalaya Vs National Council for Teacher Education Andanr

Indradev Institute of Education and Technology Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Deepak Kaushik Vs Principal Judge North West District and Ors.

Pravar Gautam Vs Wave Megacity Center Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Gulshan Kumar and Others Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Another

Smt Sangeeta Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Siddharth Mishra Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Abishek Kumar Vs Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited

Mayank Khnadelwal & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi (T)Hrough Its Commissioner & Anr.

Interglobe Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Lalbaba Engineering Limited Vs Chairman, Railway Board & Ors.

Arya Samaj Mandir Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation