SC Seeks BCI’s Response on Compliance with Judgment Restricting Excess Enrolment Fees

The Supreme Court of India has asked the Bar Council of India (BCI) to clarify whether the directions issued in its earlier judgment in Gaurav Kumar vs. Union of India & Others (W.P. (C) No. 352 of 2023) are being followed in letter and spirit. This came during the hearing of a contempt petition filed by K. L. J. A. Kiran Babu against the Karnataka State Bar Council, listed before a Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan on July 15, 2025.

Background of the Case:
The petitioner, appearing in person, alleged that the BCI and various State Bar Councils were not complying with the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling, particularly regarding the collection of enrolment fees.

READ ALSO  Pujari Has No Ownership Rights Over Temple Property, Merely a Manager: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the main judgment (Gaurav Kumar case), the Supreme Court had directed that:

Video thumbnail
  • State Bar Councils (SBCs) cannot charge enrolment fees beyond what is expressly permitted under Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act.
  • SBCs and BCI cannot demand any additional payments, apart from the stipulated enrolment fee and applicable stamp duty, as a condition for enrolment.
  • Any decision by SBCs to levy fees exceeding this limit violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 19(1)(g) (Right to Practice Profession) of the Constitution.
  • These directions would apply prospectively, and SBCs are not required to refund excess fees collected prior to the date of the judgment.
READ ALSO  [Sec 482 CrPC] Accused Can Seek Discharge At Stage Of Commencement Of Trial Only If There Is Patent Miscarriage Of Justice: Kerala HC

Arguments Presented:
The Court specifically asked the petitioner in what capacity he had filed the contempt petition, noting that he was not an aggrieved person. The petitioner argued that any individual could bring a contempt petition in public interest. The Court, however, chose not to delve into that legal debate at this stage.

Court’s Observations and Directions:
While declining to issue notice for the time being, the Bench expressed its intention to first understand the status of compliance. It requested Mr. Manan Mishra, learned counsel and Chairman of the Bar Council of India, to appear and assist the Court in the matter.

The Supreme Court directed the Registry to provide Mr. Mishra with a complete set of the paper book and scheduled the matter for further hearing on August 4, 2025.

READ ALSO  Supreme Court overrules NV International judgement that held delay beyond 120 Days for Arbitration Appeal u/s 37 cannot be condoned

Case Details:

  • Case Title: K. L. J. A. Kiran Babu vs. Karnataka State Bar Council
  • Case Type: Contempt Petition (Civil) Diary No.16629/2025
  • Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan

Law Trend
Law Trendhttps://lawtrend.in/
Legal News Website Providing Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court

Related Articles

Latest Articles