Supreme Court: Article 220 does not bar ex-HC judges from SBC co-option
The case concerns a dispute over the eligibility of former High Court judges and senior women advocates to be co-opted as women members of State Bar Councils, specifically addressing whether Article 220 of the Constitution bars former High Court judges from such co-option.
Petitioners: Swati Sinha & Ors.; Respondents: Union of India & Ors.; Bench: Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice V. Mohana
- The Court clarified that Article 220 does not bar former High Court judges from being co-opted into State Bar Councils.
- Women advocates who lost SBC elections are eligible for co-option.
- The term 'senior' refers to advocates with substantial practice experience, not just 'senior advocates'.
- Co-option categories: (i) former women judges of the jurisdictional High Court, or (ii) senior women members of the Bar with fair standing.
- For Tripura SBC (15 members), only one woman member will be co-opted.
Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.
The original document
Document details
| Official title | Article 220 Doesn't Bar Ex-HC Judges' Co-option As Bar Council Women Members: Supreme Court |
| Source body | Supreme Court of India — orders & judgments |
| Reference number | SWATI SINHA & ORS. v UNION OF INDIA & ORS in YOGAMAYA M.G. Vs UNION OF INDIA|MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. OF 2026 [DIARY NO(S).51143/ |
| Status | closed (order) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Closing date | — |
| Documents | 1 |