The Supreme Court on Tuesday authorised the Bar Council of India (BCI) to evolve a uniform, transparent and fair mechanism for the 10% co-option component of women’s representation in State Bar Councils, observing that the proposal suggested by the BCI appeared to be “very fair.”
A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana noted that elections to most State Bar Councils had either been completed or were nearing completion and that the only surviving issue in the proceedings concerned the manner in which the additional 10% seats earmarked for women through co-option should be filled.
During the hearing, the BCI informed the Court that it had framed co-option rules and was willing to place them before the Court. The Bench recalled that its earlier directions contemplated 30% representation for women lawyers, comprising 20% through elections and 10% through co-option. Emphasising the objective behind the exercise, the Court observed:
“
“Our purpose was to introduce 30% representation, not reservation, 30% representation for women.”
The Court also took note of the BCI’s suggestion that the women candidates securing the highest votes among the unsuccessful candidates could be considered for co-option. Responding to the proposal, the Bench remarked:
“
“What probably the Bar Council is suggesting seems to be very, very fair.”
During the hearing, counsels appearing for various State Bar Councils highlighted practical difficulties that may arise in ensuring representation for lawyers from smaller regions and territories such as Goa, Daman and Diu, Lakshadweep, Ladakh, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, and the North-Eastern States. The Court acknowledged that these concerns deserved consideration while designing the co-option framework.
Accepting the need for a flexible yet uniform approach, the Bench directed the BCI to consult newly elected members of State Bar Councils and other stakeholders before finalising a proposal. The Court authorised the BCI to evolve a mechanism that may account for the peculiar circumstances of individual State Bar Councils while maintaining transparency and fairness. Dictating its order, the Court recorded:
“The only issue that survives for consideration in the matter pertaining to providing 30% effective representation to women lawyers in the State Bar Councils is with respect to the modality to be adopted for 10% co-option.”
Accordingly, the Court authorised the BCI to formulate and submit its proposal after stakeholder consultations. The matter has been posted for further consideration on July 15, 2026.
Appearances
Petitioner: Rajesh Singh Chauhan.
Respondents: Radhika Gautam (R-2, R-9), Tatini Basu (R-3), Prateek Bhatia (R-7), Sumita Ray (R-8), Manisha Ambwani (R-10), Manish Kumar Saran (R-11), H. Chandra Sekhar (R-12), Aljo K. Joseph (R-13), Vikas Upadhyay (R-14), Arvind S. Avhad (R-15), Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar (R-16), Anshuman Singh (R-19), Yusuf (R-21), Siddhartha Sinha (R-22), Vivek Narayan Sharma (R-24) and Anando Mukherjee (R-26).
Impleadment Applicants: Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, Shashank Singh, Prateek Kumar, Nupur Kumar, Mukesh Kumar and Akshay Amritanshu.
Intervenors: Vishal Arun Mishra, Surender Singh Hooda, Shwetank Sailakwal, Sanchit Garga, Roopali Lakhotia, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Rahat Bansal, R.H.A. Sikander, Kheyali Singh, Kailash Prashad Pandey, K.R. Chitra, Javedur Rahman, Amol B. Karande, AG Veritas Law and Abdul Qadir Abbasi.

