A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the order while hearing a batch of petitions concerning election-related issues in various State Bar Councils.

The Court said the newly constituted tribunals would function alongside the already existing election tribunal headed by former Supreme Court judge Sudhanshu Dhulia.

“In addition to the existing election tribunals, we hereby constitute two more tribunals,” the bench recorded in its order.

One of the newly formed tribunals will be headed by former Supreme Court judge Deepak Gupta. Its members will include former Andhra Pradesh High Court Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Senior Advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) was directed to obtain formal consent from all members and officially notify the constitution of the tribunals within three days. The Court also granted liberty to aggrieved parties to approach the respective tribunals with their grievances.

Further, all State Bar Councils were directed to preserve election records until the disputes are finally adjudicated.

During the hearing, BCI Chairman and Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra requested the Court to set up a high-powered election supervisory committee, similar to the one already headed by Justice Dhulia, to oversee disputes relating to bar council elections.

The proceedings also witnessed a sharp exchange between Mishra and Senior Advocate Kumud Lata Das, who appeared for the petitioners.

Das objected to the inclusion of a BCI representative in the proposed committee. Responding to her submissions, Mishra remarked that the allegations were “very very bad.”

Das, in turn, accused Mishra of attempting to dominate women members and objected to his tone during the hearing. She also referred to his long tenure as BCI Chairman from 2010 to 2026.

Mishra dismissed the remarks as “absurd allegations.” However, Das later clarified that her comments were not personal in nature and noted that such exchanges were common between them as both belonged to the same State. Mishra accepted the clarification amicably.

Before concluding the hearing, the CJI observed that both counsel had made significant contributions to the important issue concerning the conduct of Bar Council elections.