No law prohibits active member of political party from contesting Bar bodies polls: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday said there is no law which prohibits an active member of a political party from contesting the election of Bar bodies and it cannot enact a law either in this regard, as "in a democracy, there is always scope for different ideologies but that should be in conformity with the Constitution".

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan declined to entertain a PIL by an advocate seeking directions to the Centre and Bar Council of India, to ensure that those contesting elections of Bar bodies should not be members of any political party.

The bench said, "There is no law, which prohibits an active member of a political party to contest the election of Bar bodies. You want us to enact a law. Sorry, it can't be done."

Senior advocate Sirajuddin, appeared for the petitioner advocate C R Jaya Sukin.

The bench cited legal luminary Ram Jethmalani to point out that he held the post of Bar Council of India chairperson and served as the president of the SCBA.

"If an office-bearer of the Bar has a political ideology, what's wrong with that," the bench asked.

The bench also asked the petitioner's counsel, "you want to oust Mr Kapil Sibal as the president of SCBA (Supreme Court Bar Association)? You want to oust (Manan Kumar) Mishra (BJP Rajya Sabha MP from Bihar) as the chairman of the Bar Council of India?"

Referring to Jethmalani, the bench said that he was also in Parliament and was affiliated with different political parties.

"Do you want the country to be deprived of the views and contribution of these brilliant multi-talented persons," the bench further asked, adding, "we don’t think that association with political parties will have any effect".

The bench also wondered how it could ask a person, associated with a political party, not to contest elections of a Bar body.

Realising that court is not willing to entertain the plea, petitioner's counsel sought a direction to refer the issue to the Law Commission, but the bench said it was not going to pass any such direction. The bench finally allowed the petitioner to withdraw the plea.