Taking stern notice of campaign materials defacing the court premises and election-related disruptions, the Lucknow Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, comprising Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla, has instituted a fresh suo motu Public Interest Litigation titled In Re: Conduct of Elections to the Oudh Bar Association. The Court issued comprehensive directives barring candidates from taking out processions, distributing food items, or circulating handbills within the premises and within a 100-meter radius outside, warning that violations could lead to immediate debarment from contesting the elections.
Background of the Case
The matter arose through an application for modification (C. M. Application No. 5 of 2026) filed in a previously decided Public Interest Litigation, WPIL No. 177 of 2026 (Mithlesh Srivastava v. The Oudh Bar Association). The applicant approached the Court seeking directions to restrain candidates running for various governing body offices of the Oudh Bar Association from affixing stickers, banners, and hoardings inside or outside the High Court premises, erecting tents that block roads, and distributing food items within court premises, particularly on polling day.
The Court observed that candidates were pasting stickers and posters inside and outside the High Court premises at Lucknow, which not only sullied the aesthetics of the building and premises but was otherwise impermissible. Because the original petition stood already decided, the Division Bench converted the averments and information into a separate suo motu Public Interest Litigation.
Submissions of Parties and Counsel
The petitioner in the proceedings was represented by counsels Km. Vishwa Mohini, Jan Laxmi Tewari Senani, and Rajesh Kumar.
During the proceedings, Returning Officer Shri R.B.S. Rathor appeared before the Bench and informed the Court that he had personally issued multiple notices cautioning candidates against pasting posters and stickers on walls inside and outside the premises, yet the situation showed little improvement.
Members of the Bar, including Shri Sanjay Misra and petitioner’s counsel Km. Vishwa Mohini, emphasized the urgent necessity of judicial intervention, pointing out that counseling and advisories from the Returning Officer and senior advocates had failed to achieve the desired restraint among contesting candidates.
Additionally, members of the Bar suggested reviving the ‘Know Your Candidate’ (KYC) program conducted in past elections, where candidates directly address members to help voters make informed decisions. Suggestions were also raised that the Returning Officer or the Elders Committee could utilize Bar funds to provide edibles to voters on election day to prevent individual candidates from doing so. Shri Rathor confirmed to the Court that he would actively consider the KYC initiative and explore providing edibles in consultation with the Elders Committee.
Precedents Cited and Court’s Analysis
The Division Bench highlighted the Supreme Court’s decision in Amit Sachan Vs. Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow (AIR OnLine 2021 SC 1260), which arose from Division Bench orders dated August 24, 2021, and August 27, 2021, in PIL Civil No. 18055 of 2021. In that matter, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, thereby affirming the High Court’s directions.
The Court reiterated the directions issued in Paragraph 24 of the August 24, 2021 order, which mandated:
“(IV) The Elders’ Committee, Awadh Bar Association shall formulate ‘code of conduct’ for elections keeping in view the recommendations and directions issued today.
(V) Canvassing by distribution of visiting cards/cards, pamphlets or poster should be prohibited in the elections of the Awadh Bar Association. Distribution of lunch packets, refreshment, etc. should not be allowed either before or during the election and all those who are found distributing such things should be debarred from contesting elections. Hosting or arranging dinner parties for canvassing for elections should be prohibited.
(VI) Senior Registrar or any other Officer deputed by him in consultation with the Elders’ Committee shall debar such Members of Awadh Bar Association from participating the ensuing election who may be found having indulged in misbehaviour and disrupting the process of election on 14.8.2021 while the polling was in process, after due verification of the complaints received and perusal of video clipping and such other evidence as may be available.”
The Bench also referenced Paragraph 3.2 of Amit Sachan, which cited the Supreme Court ruling in R. Muthukrishnan Vs. Registrar General, High Court of Judicature of Madras [(2019) 16 SCC 407]. In Paragraph 31 of R. Muthukrishnan, the Supreme Court had underscored:
“31. There is no room for taking out the procession in the court premises, slogan raising in the courts, use of loudspeakers, use of intemperate language with the Judges or to create any kind of disturbance in the peaceful, respectful and dignified functioning of the court. Its sanctity is not less than that of a holy place reserved for noble souls. We are shocked to note that the instances of abject misbehaviour of the advocates in the premises of the High Court of Madras resulting into requisitioning of CISF to maintain safety and majesty of the Court and rule of law. It has been observed by this Court in Mahipal Singh Rana [Mahipal Singh Rana v. State of U.P., (2016) 8 SCC 335: (2016) 4 SCC (Civ) 1: (2016) 3 SCC (Cri) 476: (2016) 2 SCC (L&S) 390] that the Bar Council has failed to discharge its duties on the disciplinary side. In our opinion, in case such state of affairs continues and the Bar Council fails to discharge duties the Court shall have to supervise its functioning and to pass appropriate permissible orders. Independence of the Bar and the Bench both are supreme, there has to be balance inter se.”
Applying these principles, the High Court observed that where regulatory bodies fall short of discharging their responsibilities, the Court must supervise functioning and issue permissible orders to protect the sanctity and dignified functioning of the institution.
The Decision and Directions
Reiterating the binding nature of the earlier 2021 directions for the upcoming 2026–27 Oudh Bar Association elections, the Court passed the following explicit directives:
- Inquiry and Videography: The Senior Registrar of the Lucknow Bench is directed to conduct an inquiry, photograph, and videograph the interior and exterior of the High Court premises to identify pasted posters and stickers, and submit a detailed report listing the names of the candidates involved.
- Immediate Removal: All candidates whose posters or stickers have been affixed inside or outside the premises must take immediate measures to remove them. Failure to comply will invite serious consequences, including debarment from contesting.
- Ban on Processions, Food Distribution, and Pamphlets: No candidate shall take out any procession or distribute food items within the High Court premises. Distributing handbills and pamphlets inside the court compound or within a 100-meter radius outside the premises is strictly barred.
- Consequences of Non-Compliance: Any violation of these directives will entail debarment from the election and may lead to further action, including reference to the Bar Council.
- Impleadment and Notice: The Court directed the office to implead the U.P. Bar Council, Prayagraj, the Elders Committee of the Oudh Bar Association, Lucknow, and the Returning Officer as opposite parties, with notices served through the Senior Registrar. A copy of the order is to be communicated to the Chairman of the Elders Committee to be affixed on the notice board.
- Appearance for Bar Council: The Court further directed that the name of Shri Subhash Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the U.P. Bar Council, shall be printed in the cause list whenever the matter is listed next.
The matter has been directed to be listed as fresh on September 29, 2026, alongside WPIL No. 18055 of 2021.
Case Details
Case Title: Mithlesh Srivastava v. The Oudh Bar Association, Honble High Court Sitting At Lko. Thru. Its General Secy. (Registered as Suo Motu PIL: In Re: Conduct of Elections to the Oudh Bar Association)
Case No.: Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 177 of 2026 (C. M. Application No. 5 of 2026)
Bench: Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla
Date: September 18, 2026
