Delhi High Court rejects petition challenging Delhi court bar association election results

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a writ petition challenging the validity of the New Delhi Bar Association (NDBA) elections held in 2025 at the Patiala House Court [Vipin Kumar Sharma Vs The Returning Officer NDBA Elections, 2025]..Justice Mini Pushkarna observed that the writ petition filed in the matter was not maintainable in this case.A civil suit or election petition would be appropriate to decide issues pertaining to the NDBA elections, the Court held.“A pure election dispute challenging the result of an election, on the basis of disputed questions of facts, is purely a private dispute, which ought to be raised by way of an Election Petition, if the rules provide for the same, or, alternatively by filing a civil suit. The present petition, being in the nature of an election dispute, whereby, the petitioners are seeking to agitate a purely private cause/interest, i.e., to assert a right to be elected as an office bearer of the NDBA, is not maintainable. Thus, consistent with the established position of law, challenges to the conduct of an election are appropriately addressed in an Election Petition or a civil suit, and not through a writ petition,” the Court stated. .The Court also observed that the NDBA elections do not concern the public functions of the court and that the contesting candidates and the Returning Officer are private individuals. This too led the Court to conclude that a writ petition was not the appropriate remedy in this case. .The NDBA elections were held on March 21, 2025, and the results were declared on March 22. As per ‘NDBA Election 2025 Guidelines for Voters’, only proximity card holders are allowed to cast votes or even enter the polling area. However, some of the candidates who contested the elections moved the High Court with a plea to quash the election results, alleging that there were irregularities that took place during the polls.They alleged that persons without proximity cards broke into the polling area and cast votes for their candidates. The petitioners argued that this caused a discrepancy in the number of votes cast and the number of proximity cards scanned..However, the Court yesterday commented that there was little evidence to support allegations that the NDBA election results were tainted by such unfair practices. “There is nothing before this Court to suggest that any unauthorized persons, without valid proximity cards, cast their votes in the NDBA Election, or that there was any bogus voting,” the Court stated. The Court agreed with the Returning Officer’s (RO) submissions that only voters with valid proximity cards cast votes in the election. The proximity cards were verified at different points of the election process, including physical verification at the voting area. The Court also agreed with RO’s submission that there was no extension of the poll timing. The Court further noted that no complaint was filed regarding any malfunction of the machines used to scan proximity cards.It proceeded to dispose of the plea with liberty for the petitioners to file a civil suit instead. In case a civil suit is filed, the Court stated that the observations made in its judgment cannot influence the proceedings in the suit..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.