Archive · 5 Aug 2026
Supreme Court Refuses to Interfere in Bar's Democratic Process
The Supreme Court is the highest court in India.
A man named Ashish Gopal Garg went to this court with a complaint.
He was unhappy with the Supreme Court Bar Association, the group of lawyers who work at the court.
The group had made a resolution to support an activist named Sonam Wangchuk.
Wangchuk was on a fast to draw attention to problems with the education system and exams.
Garg wanted the judges to stop the Association from making such decisions.
But the judges said they cannot interfere in the Association's democratic process.
They explained that this is an internal matter for the Association itself.
The judges told Garg to take his complaint to the Association's election committee instead.
The Supreme Court refused to restrain the Supreme Court Bar Association from passing unilateral resolutions, saying it cannot interfere in the democratic process of the Bar.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the matter pertains to the internal affairs of the Association.
The court was hearing a plea by Ashish Gopal Garg objecting to a resolution passed by the SCBA expressing solidarity with activist Sonam Wangchuk.
The SCBA on July 16 appealed to Wangchuk to end his fast over issues surrounding NEET examinations and the education system, urging him not to risk his health and life.
The court asked the petitioner to approach the SCBA election committee for his grievances.
- Who
- The Supreme Court of India (bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana), petitioner Ashish Gopal Garg, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), and activist Sonam Wangchuk.
- What
- The Supreme Court refused to restrain the SCBA from passing resolutions, calling the matter the Association's internal democratic affairs.
- When
- Wednesday, August 5; the SCBA's appeal to Wangchuk was made on July 16.
- Where
- New Delhi; SCBA president Vikas Singh visited Jantar Mantar to meet Wangchuk.
- Why
- The court held that it cannot interfere in the democratic process of the Bar and that the issue pertains to the internal affairs of the Association.
Petitioner's position
Court and Bar Association position
Judicial restraint on SCBA resolutions
Petitioner's position
Ashish Gopal Garg sought a court order restraining the SCBA from passing any resolutions until elections, objecting to the resolution expressing solidarity with Sonam Wangchuk.
Court and Bar Association position
The Supreme Court refused to intervene, stating it cannot interfere in the democratic process of the Bar, and the bench noted the matter pertains to the Association's internal affairs.
Proper forum for grievances
Petitioner's position
The petitioner approached the Supreme Court directly with his objection to the SCBA resolution.
Court and Bar Association position
The Court directed the petitioner to approach the SCBA election committee for his grievances instead of the court.
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Bench
- Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana
- Petitioner
- Ashish Gopal Garg
- Subject
- Supreme Court Bar Association
- Date of order
- August 5
- Location
- New Delhi
- SCBA resolution date
- July 16
- Resolution topic
- Solidarity with Sonam Wangchuk's fast over NEET and the education system