New Delhi: The Bar Council of India (BCI) on Thursday asked state bar councils not to enrol, for now, any student passing out of NALSAR Law University, Hyderabad, in 2026, till the time it completes an inquiry into the protest by a section of students against inviting CJI Surya Kant to the next convocation.
In a letter addressed to state bar councils, Bar Council of India Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra said, “Till further orders, no student of NALSAR University of Law, who obtained the Law Degree in the year 2026, shall be enrolled by any State Bar Council as an Advocate.”
“A student of Law, having no regard or respect for the highest Judicial Office of the country, is not expected to be a responsible or sensible Advocate, Teacher or a Judge. Such persons shall always be a liability on the profession,” he said.
The BCI also sought a factual report from the University on the persons instrumental in initiating, organising, or mobilising the campaign regarding the participation of the CJI at the upcoming convocation of NALSAR University of Law, the date of which is still to be finalised.
The BCI asked the University to state whether permission was sought or granted for any protest or organised activity, and whether any University rule concerning student conduct, discipline, use of University platforms, or the conduct of official functions was invoked.
“Where information is available, the University should also indicate whether any person identified as a principal organiser or coordinator is already enrolled as an advocate with a State Bar Council and provide the relevant enrolment particulars,” said Mishra.
He said, “It is also necessary to reiterate that legal education necessarily encourages critical reasoning, debate and analysis of judicial decisions. But, at the same time, those seeking entry into a regulated profession intrinsically connected with the administration of justice are expected to appreciate the distinction between reasoned criticism and conduct.”
Justifying the decision to identify the students behind the protest, the BCI said, “Such conduct reflects adversely upon the person’s suitability for entry into or association with the legal profession and is inconsistent with the dignity, discipline and ethical standards of the legal profession. Our experience is that such people are always involved in strikes and boycotts and tarnish the image of the Legal Profession.”
The BCI told the university that its report should also identify the names and designations of office-bearers of the Student Bar Council, Students’ Union, student committee, or other recognised student organisation who participated in initiating, approving, coordinating, or circulating the campaign.
“And if any faculty member, research scholar, alumnus or outside person participated in initiating, drafting, coordinating, advising or facilitating the campaign, the University should state the nature of such involvement,” said the BCI.
Over 400 students, including those who passed out in previous years, had opposed the proposal to invite the CJI as chief guest at the convocation while objecting to his remarks during the hearing on a petition alleging police excesses against student protesters at Jantar Mantar in Delhi last month.
(IANS)
