A member of the Bar Council of India has strongly opposed the decision of BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra to restrain State Bar Councils from enrolling college students of NALSAR College of Legislation who obtained their legislation levels in 2026, calling the blanket route “manifestly arbitrary” and an infringement of the graduates’ constitutional rights.
In a letter addressed to the BCI Chairman, Advocate N. Manoj Kumar, a member of each the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Kerala, expressed “deep anguish” over the direction issued by the BCI Chairman on August 13. The communication had directed that every one college students of NALSAR who obtained their legislation levels in 2026 be stored from enrolment as advocates pending an inquiry right into a marketing campaign by a bit of scholars towards the participation of the Chief Justice of India within the convocation.
Taking objection to Mishra’s stand, Manoj Kumar stated, “In a democratic nation, college students, like each different citizen, are entitled to specific their views and disagreement.” He acknowledged that threatening college students with denial or indefinite deferment of enrolment merely for expressing an opinion was “wholly unwarranted” and amounted to “unparalleled arbitrariness.”
“Insofar because the communication itself recognises that mere participation in, or help of, a illustration doesn’t quantity to disqualification and that the position of every particular person must be individually examined, the blanket prohibition towards your entire 2026 batch is, subsequently, manifestly arbitrary. The appropriate of tons of of eligible legislation graduates to hunt enrolment can’t be suspended with none believable purpose,” he wrote to BCI Chairman.
He cautioned that measures of this nature may create an impression that the BCI was looking for to appease the judiciary, and known as upon the Chairman to withdraw the blanket route “forthwith.”
“It’s excessive time that the Bar Council of India refrains from measures which will give the impression of appeasing the judiciary and as a substitute concentrates on its major statutory duty of defending the rights, privileges, and pursuits of the advocates’ group and sustaining the independence and dignity of the Bar. The blanket route ought to, subsequently, be withdrawn forthwith.”
