"There Are Serious Issues": The Delhi Bar Council Election Vote-Counting Order Is Not Modified by the Supreme Court
 

A request to permit the Delhi Bar Council election counting to continue without announcing the final results was denied by the Supreme Court on Monday.

Chief Justice of Surya Kant responded to Senior Advocate Vikas Singh's oral motion to amend the Court's previous order stopping the vote counting by saying:

"It's only a transitional order; we don't want to prejudice the High Court. We won't allow, there are serious issues. Please go argue before HC." Nothing is pending in front of us. There are reasons why we won't change the order.

Singh argued that the counting had previously been approved by the Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia committee. The Delhi Bar Council has already spent Rs 5 crores on the elections, he continued. He made it clear that he does not want the results to be announced; he just wants the counting to continue. "Let the procedure go on, but not the outcomes. "Let the results be declared subject to the Delhi High Court's order," Singh said. "There are issues," CJI maintained.

The candidates' attorney argued that the Supreme Court issued the ruling without giving them a chance to be heard. According to her, there were no complaints about how the polls were conducted. She claimed that the ballot papers are lying around and that the Delhi Bar Council spends Rs 5 lakhs every day.

The CJI reiterated that the Delhi High Court may hear all of the arguments. The CJI consented to ask the High Court to hear the case on Monday of next week when the counsel mentioned that the court would be closed for summer vacation on May 29.

The following order was issued by the bench made up of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi:

"Miscellaneous applications are recorded upon oral mention. Due to the urgency of the case, the Hon'ble CJ of the High Court is asked to schedule a Division Bench hearing, ideally for Monday. Parties are free to request suitable temporary orders, which the High Court may take into consideration.

Related News

If the accused is served with a consolidated notice of demand, a single complaint for the dishonor of more than three checks may be maintained: The J&K&L High Court

Orissa High Court Shares Concerns About Data Breach & Privacy Violations While Upholding Mandatory PAN-Aadhaar Linking For Demat Accounts

The Supreme Court dismisses the case against a public servant, stating that S. 197 CrPC does not envision the concept of "deemed sanction."