New Delhi: The Supreme Court has granted a final opportunity to State Bar Councils to comply with its directions prohibiting them from charging more than the statutory enrollment fee of ₹750, warning that failure to do so will invite contempt proceedings against responsible authorities.
A Division Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan issued this stern warning while hearing Contempt Petition (Civil) Diary No. 59883/2025 filed by Priyadarshini Saha against Pinaki Ranjan Banerjee, along with Writ Petition (Civil) No. 774/2025.
The Court observed that despite efforts by the Bar Council of India (BCI) to ensure compliance, certain State Bar Councils continue to violate the directions issued in the landmark judgment Gaurav Kumar vs. Union of India & Ors. (W.P. (C) No. 352/2023), delivered on July 30, 2024.
During the hearing, Ms. Radhika Gautam, counsel for the BCI, informed the Bench that the BCI had notified all State Bar Councils of their obligation to follow the Court’s directions.
However, the Bench expressed displeasure over continued violations. Justice Pardiwala noted:
“Although the Bar Council of India has taken up the issue with all State Bar Councils as regards due compliance of the directions issued by this Court, yet some of the State Bar Councils still continue to recover in excess of the statutory fee prescribed.”
Directing stricter measures, the Court ordered the BCI to issue a formal written circular to all State Bar Councils, stating:
“We give one last opportunity to the Bar Council of India to take up the aforesaid issue very seriously with all State Bar Councils, and this time it should be in the form of a written circular.”
Issuing a clear warning for future violations, the Bench stated:
“In future, if it is brought to our notice that any State Bar Council is charging beyond the statutory fee prescribed, we shall proceed to hold the responsible authority guilty of contempt.”
The Court further directed the BCI to explicitly highlight this warning in the circular and mandated that the exercise be completed within four weeks. Once the circular is emailed to State Bar Councils, they must respond immediately to the BCI.
Addressing complaints regarding retention of original documents by Bar Councils, the Bench held:
“We also direct the Bar Council of India to inform all State Bar Councils that they cannot withhold documents of applicants who have applied for enrollment.”
The Court clarified that document retention cannot be used as a coercive measure for fee recovery:
“None of the State Bar Councils shall withhold the documents of applicants on the ground of non-payment of fees demanded.”
It further directed that once the statutory fee is paid and a request for return of documents is made, such documents must be returned immediately.
This order reinforces the Supreme Court’s earlier directives in the Gaurav Kumar judgment fixing enrollment fees strictly at the statutory limit.
The matter will be listed after four weeks for compliance review. The Court also permitted dasti (immediate service) of the order, highlighting the urgency of implementation.
Order Date: October 30, 2025
Case Title: Priyadarshini Saha vs. Pinaki Ranjan Banerjee
