The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday indicated that the results of the Karnataka State Bar Council (KSBC) election will depend on the outcome of petitions seeking the redressal of alleged irregularities in the poll process [Sandya U Prabhu v The Returning Officer].

Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that as many as sixteen complaints had been filed alleging that the elections were marred by various irregularities.

The Court noted that given the seriousness of the allegations, the reciept of multiple complaints and in the absence of any material yet to show that proper steps were taken to address such complaints, some interim measures may be required to safeguard the sanctity of the electoral process.

The Court also recalled that when allegations were recently made about the Delhi Bar Council polls, the vote count process was stayed until petitions complaining of such irregularities were decided. The Court, however, refrained from ordering any stay on the KSBC poll vote count on Wednesday.

"Before any such order is passed, this Court deems it appropriate, in the interests of fairness, to afford a further opportunity to the Returning Officer and the concerned authorities to place on record the steps taken pursuant to the complaints received," the Court reasoned.

Therefore, it ordered the electoral returning officer and other authorities concerned to indicate (i) whether the complaints of irregularities in the poll process were forwarded to the Central Election Tribunal/Committee; and (ii) the dates on which such forwarding was made, and the action taken by the Central Election Tribunal/Committee thereon.

The returning officer, a body overseeing the elections, as well as the Bar Council of India (BCI) were also asked to file a formal response with their overall stance in the matter. The BCI has also been asked to address the Court on the rules governing the resressal of Bar election-related complaints and disputes.

"Such information would assist the Court in determining whether the statutory framework has been adhered to in the present case and whether any further directions are warranted," the Court said.

Notably, the Court added,

"In the unlikely event of the counting being completed, the results shall be subject to the result of the above petitions."

The Court is slated to hear the matter further today.

The matter concerns that KSBC elections 2026, which took place earlier this year. Writ petitions were later filed alleging malpractices and rigging of the elections.

On of the petitioners has called on the Court to direct the production of CCTV footage from the polling area and the vote count areas. The petitioner further seeks the production of soft copies of ballot papers where different ink is found to have been used for marking, which could indicate that votes were rigged.

The petitioner has also urged the Court to direct the returning officer not to declare the results of the election until all issues concerning the alleged malpractices during the polls are properly resolved.

In the interim order passed on June 10, Wednesday, the Court noted that there is a comprehensive mechanism set out for resolving such Bar election related disputes under Rule 7 of a BCI notification issued in 2023.

The aim of this rule is to resolve such disputes at the earliest possible stage.

"Failure to do so may result in serious complications during or after the counting process, affecting not only the candidate against whom the complaint is made but potentially the entire electoral outcome itself," the Court added.

The Court noted that the KSBC elections concluded in April 2026. However the results were not yet announced. It further observed that cancelling the candidature of a candidate at the counting stage would consume time, resources and could change the position of several candidates.

Considering the complicated consequences of a decision under Rule 7 in the counting stage, the Court decided to seek the Returning Officer's response on the steps taken on 16 complaints said to have been filed about poll irregularities.

The Court has specifically asked whether the actions of the Returning Officer complied with Rule 7, which requires the forwarding of such complaints to the Central Election Tribunal/ Committee.