The Delhi High Court on January 31, 2026, disposed of a petition concerning the surplus vote count exceeding the votes polled in the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) election, ruling that there is no need to interfere with the Returning Officer's decision.
However, the court directed that the election results be declared only after the vote reconciliation is completed.
The court observed that the Returning Officer, a former judge of the Delhi High Court, has already assured the reconciliation of votes after the completion of vote counting. The counting process continues following polling held in February.
The petition, filed by nine candidates including Advocate Anushkaa Arora and Shahid Ali, challenged the Returning Officer’s decision dated March 20, 2026, seeking immediate vote reconciliation during the counting process. Justice Amit Bansal, while disposing of the petition, stated, “In my considered view, no grounds for interference with the aforesaid decision are made out. The grievance of the candidates/petitioners has been adequately addressed by the Returning Officer, and the reconciliation process will be carried out once the process of counting is over and before the results are declared.”
He further ordered, “Needless to state, the results of the elections shall be declared only after the reconciliation process is conducted.”
The petitioners contended that after the conclusion of the first round of counting, some candidates would be eliminated and that reconciliation should occur at that point. The court advised, “Let a representation be made by the petitioners in this regard before the Returning Officer.”
Advocate T Singh Dev, representing the Bar Council of Delhi, raised objections regarding the maintainability of the petition. Justice Bansal concluded, “In light of the order passed above, the Court need not go into the aspect of maintainability, which is kept open.”
The petition highlighted that on March 18, 2026, the Returning Officer concluded counting of votes polled on the first day of the BCD elections, held on February 21, declaring the total tally as 17,799 votes. However, on March 21, the total votes polled stood at 17,585, revealing an unexplained surplus of 214 votes.
The petitioners stated that the Returning Officer, in a communication dated March 20, declined to conduct an immediate verification, deferring reconciliation until the completion of the entire counting process on the grounds that reconciliation is time-consuming and not carried out daily.