Fwd: Further Concerns about the Bar Council of Delhi elections and how complaints are being dealt with

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Seema Sapra <seema.sapra@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2026, 12:50
Subject: Further Concerns about the Bar Council of Delhi elections and how complaints are being dealt with
To: <sec.supervisorycommittee@gmail.com>, Maninder Singh <ms@singhmaninder.com>, <advneeraj.ndba@gmail.com>, <chetansharmamailbox@yahoo.co.in>, Talwant Singh <talwantsingh@gmail.com>, <barcouncilofdelhi@rediffmail.com>, REGISTRAR GENERAL Delhi High Court <rg.dhc@nic.in>, Manan Mishra <manankumarmishra@gmail.com>, pavan narang <pavan.narang@gmail.com>

The Justice Dhulia Committee should ask that the BCD file an affidavit on whether it took affidavits from the counting staff. I don't think they did. I was told that the BCD hired an agency which supplied staff. Why did staff include 22  year old law students. Are law students going to count BCD election votes? The fact that the BCD Secy could not answer on whether it took an affidavit from the accused in the FIR for vote tampering shows that the BCD probably did not take affidavits from other counting staff also. Mere oral statements of the BCD cannot be relied upon. BCD must be asked to file affidavits before the Dhulia Committee. 

The Justice Dhulia Committee must also look into the background and ties of the Agency which the BCD hired to provide counting staff. It is possible that the Agency owner will have some links, maybe to the BJP or to some powerful candidates etc. How was this Agency chosen?

The names and backgrounds of all counting staff used and their affidavits and disclosures if any, should be made public. 

The suggestions put forward by the Coordination Committee of the District Courts are misconceived because once ballots are already tampered and once ballots have been left unsecured for a prolonged period of time, then post facto verification and post facto securing those suspect ballots can have no use. The only fair remedy would be cancellation of this tainted election and directions for a re-poll. 

Seema Sapra

Advocate BCD D/1159/1995 

On Sun, 26 Apr 2026, 22:55 Seema Sapra, <seema.sapra@googlemail.com> wrote:

To the Members of the High Powered Election Supervisory Committee, the Members of the Special Committee of the Bar Council of Delhi, to the Members of the Election Committee, to the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, and to the Returning Officer Retired Justice Mr Talwant Singh, 

I am writing with concern about the ongoing disputes and complaints regarding the Bar Council of Delhi elections. 

I request that the Bar Council of Delhi be more transparent about what is going on by posting information on the website of the BCD. Please upload copies of complaints as well as copies of documents showing how the BCD has responded to those complaints. 

We learn from news reports and Facebook posts that an FIR has been filed for vote tampering. Please give us more details. How were people selected to be part of the counting staff? 

Lawyers have expressed concerns about other potential incidents of vote tampering. Concerns have been expressed about CCTV being shut off, about ballot papers being left unsecured, about voting tallies not matching up, etc. Apparently one ballot box was completely empty. Please provide us with more information. 

I was shocked to see a video on Facebook of a few lawyers and an Additional Returning Officer (I  think it was Mr Sanjay Rawat) where both sides appeared to be at fault. It appears from the video that the ARO had to be physically restrained to prevent a physical altercation with Mr Rajiv Khosla. Why was Mr Sanjay Rawat trying to physically attack Mr Rajiv Khosla. The video clearly shows this. 

I hear that Mr Rajiv Khosla and some other lawyers have been suspended. Yet the BCD website has no information about this suspension. 

Mr Rajiv Khosla is a very respected Member of the Bar who has done a lot for lawyers. 

I would request that disputes and complaints be treated with transparency and fairness. Let us all know what the complaints are and how these are being addressed. Complaints must not be simply ignored. They must be documented and responded to. 

There can of course be no justification for any kind of violence, abuse or threats or intimidation. 

But protesting lawyers including a large number who are calling for a re-poll must have some avenues to see redress. And these avenues must be fair and transparent. 

The BCD must address these calls for a re-poll. We must know that the present election process is not tainted beyond repair. If it is, then we must think about whether a repoll is required. 

We are after all, all members of this Bar Council of Delhi. Its elections must be sacrosanct. We must all abjure highhandedness and treat each other with respect. 

If legitimate avenues of protests and complaints are present, then hopefully all lawyers will feel they are being treated fairly. 

I am unaware of the full facts that have led to Rajiv Khosla's suspension. But in my opinion, there are fairness concerns about the use of this suspension power without a hearing. 

I hope you all can sit with the larger lawyer community and resolve these concerns and disputes about the Bar Council of Delhi elections. 

I hope the suspensions do not have a chilling effect on what might otherwise be serious and valid complaints about the election process being vitiated. 

The Returning Officer ought to provide a facility where lawyers can meet him and raise their complaints in a manner that is dignified and fair. 

Members of the Bar must not feel frustrated with the process. They must not feel that they are not being heard. 

Advocate Seema Sapra 

Member Bar Council of Delhi 

BCD 1159/1995