"This Is Between Students And Me": Chief Justice Raps Bar Council Over Order

Back off, was the message from Chief Justice Surya Kant Mishra to Bar Council of India (BCI) that had issued a directive to all State Bar Councils not to enrol students who graduated from NALSAR University of Hyderabad. 

The BCI, the apex regulatory body of the legal profession, had issued the order to halt graduates' enrolment pending an inquiry into a campaign by students opposing the participation of Chief Justice in the university's convocation. Within hours of issuing the order, the BCI said its latest information indicated that the vast majority of the 2026 NALSAR graduates were innocent and were not inclined to participate in any move to disrespect the Chief Justice.

"Absolutely uncalled for. I myself was a student who was actively engaged in protests. It's a dialogue between me and students; who are they (BCI) to interfere," the Chief Justice underlined.

The observations came after a plea challenging the BCI circular was mentioned for urgent listing.

The top court has sought a response from BCI on its circulars, saying no punitive action should be taken against NALSAR students or faculty members.

The counsel appearing for the BCI told the bench that the circular has been withdrawn.

The Council had sought a factual report from the Vice-Chancellor on those who initiated, organised or mobilised the campaign and, pending the inquiry, directed that no 2026 graduate be enrolled by any State Bar Council. However, that decision now stands withdrawn.

Earlier, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President and Senior lawyer Vikas Singh had slammed the BCI's move as "arbitrary, illegal and disproportionate".

In a letter to BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra on August 13, Singh strongly objected to the direction, saying the blanket restriction amounted to an attempt to intimidate law students for exercising their fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.

The SCBA chief said universities were intended to be spaces for free thought and debate and that students should not be threatened with denial of entry into the legal profession merely for disagreeing with a constitutional authority.

"Students cannot be threatened with denial of their right to enter the legal profession merely because they have expressed disagreement with a constitutional authority", the senior lawyer added.