The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking the disqualification of Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra from the Rajya Sabha. The Court imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on the petitioner, Advocate Amit Kumar Diwakar, for misusing the legal process.

The Single-Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula rejected Diwakar's plea, which argued that Mishra, while serving as Chairman of the BCI, a statutory body, could not simultaneously hold office as a Rajya Sabha member. Mishra was elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Bihar as a National Democratic Alliance (NDA) candidate.

The Court ruled that Diwakar had bypassed the appropriate mechanism for challenging elections as outlined under the Representation of the People Act. The Act stipulates that any challenge to an election must be made through an election petition, and not by invoking the writ jurisdiction of the Court.

"The Petitioner has bypassed the mechanism for challenging elections, outlined in the Representation of the People Act..... Therefore, the Petitioner’s decision to invoke this Court’s writ jurisdiction without filing an election petition, amounts to a misapplication of legal principles. The claim, disguised as a writ petition, is fundamentally an attempt to challenge the election of Respondent No. 5, which cannot be examined in the present proceedings," the Court observed.

The Court also noted that Diwakar lacked the necessary locus standi to file such a petition, as he was neither an elector nor a candidate in the election in question. "Challenges to elections must be made in the prescribed manner under the Act, and the courts cannot allow writ petitions to serve as an alternative route to circumvent this established procedure," the Court stated.

The Single-Judge further rejected Diwakar's request for a writ of mandamus directing the Union Ministry of Law and Justice to initiate steps for Mishra's disqualification. The Court clarified that disqualification under Article 102(1) of the Constitution does not occur automatically and requires a formal inquiry and reasoned determination as per constitutional provisions.

The petitioner's allegation that Mishra was holding an office of profit was also dismissed.The Court held that such claims could not be a basis for directing the Ministry or the Election Commission of India to take action without following proper constitutional processes.

In conclusion, the Court described the petition as an "abuse of legal process" aimed at circumventing the proper remedy. The petition was dismissed with an order for Diwakar to deposit Rs 25,000 with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within four weeks.

"Consequently, this Court finds that the present petition not only lacks merit, but is also an abuse of the legal process, aimed at circumventing the proper remedy. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 25,000/-, to be deposited by the petitioner with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within four weeks from today," the Court ordered.

Cause Title: Amit Kumar Diwakar v. Union of India

Appearance:-

Petitioner: In person

Respondent: Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, Advocates Rangasaran Mohan, Amarpal Singh Dua, Preet Pal Singh, Tanupreet Kaur, Akanksha Singh, Unmukt Bhardwaj, Madhukar Pandey, Chetan Sharma (ASG), Ripu Daman Bhardwaj (CGSC), Vedansh Anand, Amit Gupta, Vinay Yadav, Saurabh Tripathi, Shubham Sharma, Kushagra Kumar, Abhinav Bhardwaj, Ved Prakash Sharma, Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra, Tribhuvan, Rajeev Sharma, Vinayak Sharma

Click here to read/download the Order




Justice Sanjeev NarulaDelhi High CourtBar Council of IndiaRepresentation of People Act

Sukriti Mishra