Kiran Raj

The Supreme Court directed that the position of Treasurer in the Bengaluru Advocates' Association’s (AAB) Governing Council elections, scheduled for February 2, 2025, be exclusively reserved for women candidates. The Court also instructed the High-Powered Committee (HPC) and Chief Returning Officer (CRO) to consider reserving at least 30% of other Governing Council posts for women lawyers, ensuring their adequate representation.

The bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh passed the interim order, exercising powers under Article 142 of the Constitution. The Court stated that the concerned regulations did not expressly bar reservation of posts for women. It invoked similar directions previously issued in the case of elections for the Delhi High Court and District Bar Associations.

The Court directed: “We deem it appropriate to invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and direct as follows: (i) the post of Treasurer shall be exclusively earmarked for women candidates. (ii) For this purpose, the High-Powered Committee and the Chief Returning Officer shall extend the date for inviting nominations, and, if required, the date of election may be deferred for a few days. However, such a decision shall remain at the discretion of the HPC and CRO. (iii) The High-Powered Committee and the Chief Returning Officer may also consider the desirability of ensuring adequate representation to women advocates in the Governing Council of Advocates' Association Bengaluru, so that at least 30% of elected members are women candidates with 10 years or more of practice.”

After the order was dictated, Senior Advocate Lakshmy Iyengar, representing the petitioners, sought clarification on whether the 10-year practice criterion for women candidates would apply. The Court clarified that its directions in the Delhi Bar Associations’ case, where the practice criterion was waived, would also apply mutatis mutandis to the Bengaluru Advocates’ Association elections.

The petitioners approached the Supreme Court after the Karnataka High Court, while supporting the idea of reservations for women lawyers in the AAB Governing Council, expressed the view that only the Supreme Court had the authority to issue the necessary orders.

The term of the AAB’s Governing Council ended on December 19, 2024, and the council remained unrepresented during the proceedings. The petitioners sought the Court’s intervention to address gender disparity and ensure adequate representation of women lawyers in the association's governance structure.

The Court noted its previous orders regarding bar associations in Delhi. In 2024, the Supreme Court directed the reservation of three posts for women lawyers in the Delhi High Court Bar Association elections. Additionally, it instructed that in District Bar Associations, the post of Treasurer and at least 30% of other Executive Committee posts be reserved for women lawyers. Recently, the Court extended the application of this order to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) Bar Association, Tax Bar Association, and Sales Tax Bar Association in Delhi.

The Supreme Court issued the following directions to the High-Powered Committee and Chief Returning Officer regarding the Bengaluru Advocates' Association elections:

1. The post of Treasurer in the Governing Council shall be exclusively reserved for women candidates.

2. The date for inviting nominations shall be extended, and, if necessary, the election date may also be deferred. The decision to extend or defer dates shall rest with the HPC and CRO.

3. The desirability of reserving at least 30% of other Governing Council posts for women lawyers with 10 years or more of practice shall be considered.

The Court also clarified that the directions issued in the case of the Delhi Bar Associations, where the 10-year practice criterion was waived, would apply to this case.

The Court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution, observing that the concerned regulations did not expressly prohibit reservation of posts for women lawyers in the Bengaluru Advocates’ Association elections.

Case Title: Kavitha H.C. v. The State of Karnataka and Ors.

Case Number: SLP(C) No. 1910/2025 (and connected cases)

Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh

[Read/Download order]