ITEM NO.23+48+50 COURT NO.3 SECTION IV-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).1404/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-01-2025 in WP No.35836/2024 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru]

DEEKSHA N AMRUTHESH Petitioner(s)

VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. Respondent(s)

(IA No.13494/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

WITH Item No.48 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).1808/2025 (IA No. 16750/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

Item No.50 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).1910/2025 (IA No. 17921/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 17923/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Date : 24-01-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH For Petitioner(s) :Mrs. Lakshmy Iyengar, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Amruthesh. N. P., Adv.

Mr. Harshith. S, Adv.

Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Adv.

Ms. Divya Swami, AOR Ms. Jayna Kothari, Sr. Adv.

Dr. Anindita Pujari, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath, AOR Signa ture No t Ve rifi ed Ms. Aparna Mehrotra, Adv.

Digita lly s ign ed b y Mr. Shaileshwar Yadav, Adv.

ARJUN BISHT Date: 2025.01.24

16:57: 17 IST Ms. Bhumika Chouksey, Adv.

Reason:

Ms. Deepika Purohit, Adv.

Ms. Radhika Mohapatra, Adv.

Mr. Raghav Gupta, Adv.

Ms. Nalina Mayegowda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Priyadarshi Banerjee, Adv.

Ms. Anusha Reddy, Adv.

Mr. Rishabh Singhle, Adv.

Mr. Aarlin Moncy, Adv.

Mr. Sujoy Chatterjee, AOR For Respondent(s) :

For KSBC Mr. Chandra Sekhar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

SLP(C) No.1910/2025

1. As per the office report, service on all the respondents is complete. No one has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 6, including the Advocates Association, Bengaluru. However, Mr. Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel has entered appearance, on the basis of oral instructions, on behalf of Karnataka State Bar Council. He seeks and is granted two weeks’

time to file the Vakalatnama as well as counter affidavit, if any.

2. Liberty is also granted to Advocates Association, Bengaluru, the High-Powered Committee as well as the Chief Returning Officer, appointed for conducting the elections of the said Association, to enter appearance and file their counter affidavits.

3. We have heard learned senior counsel representing the petitioner as well as those appearing in the connected matters listed today. We have also perused the impugned order dated 10.01.2025 passed by learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court in which a detailed reference is made to the Regulations of the Advocates Association, Bengaluru. The High Court has pointed out that there is no provision or reservation for women for any post under those Regulations. As regard to the orders passed by this Court from time to time, the High Court has rightly pointed out that those orders have been passed by this Court invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

4. We find from the Regulations that there is no express provisions barring earmarking or reservation of a post for the women candidates in the Advocates Association, Bengaluru. The Regulations are completely silent to that effect. That being so, we are prima facie of the view that there is no legal impediment against providing adequate representation to the women advocates in the composition of Governing Council of the Advocates Association, Bengaluru i.e., respondent no.6.

5. Consequently, we deem it appropriate to invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and direct as follows:

(i) The post of Treasurer of Advocates Association, Bengaluru shall be exclusively earmarked for women candidates.

(ii) For this purpose the High-Powered Committee and the Chief Returning Officer shall extend the date for inviting nominations and if so required, the date of election can also be deferred