College students of NALSAR Legislation College in a protest demonstration. File
| Photograph Credit score: Particular association
The Supreme Court docket on Thursday (September 3, 2026) declared that the Bar Council of India (BCI) and its chairperson, Manan Kumar Mishra, lack jurisdiction to self-discipline or penalise regulation college students, rebuking the regulatory physique’s makes an attempt to intimidate NALSAR college students exercising their constitutional proper to protest.
The courtroom insisted on clarifying the bounds of BCI’s powers although the latter had revoked its August 13 letters to NALSAR administration to launch an inquiry towards the scholars and to the State Bar Councils to dam their skilled enrolment.
A 3-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant mentioned the order, drawing the boundary for BCI, was designed to safeguard college area and college students’ proper to freely categorical dissent towards future makes an attempt to breach.
“The BCI has no jurisdiction or statutory competence as regards college students. That’s for his or her universities,” Chief Justice Kant noticed.
“On an in-depth consideration of the difficulty, we’re of the opinion that the Advocates Act, 1961, doesn’t confer, expressly or impliedly, any energy on the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils to take any disciplinary or punitive motion towards regulation college students,” the courtroom recorded within the order.
Mr. Mishra, who was current, mentioned the BCI had a task in regulating authorized schooling. However the courtroom mentioned the BCI might step in solely after enrolment. Its disciplinary powers below the Advocates Act, 1961, had been, clearly, restricted to registered advocates.
“Until then, BCI didn’t come into the image… To say a scholar won’t be enrolled…” Justice Joymalya Bagchi mentioned, leaving the sentence unfinished.
The courtroom was listening to a petition filed by two former NALSAR graduates, represented by senior advocate Ok. Parameshwar and advocate Rupali Samuel, looking for authorized motion towards the BCI and the chairperson for threatening the 2026 batch of NALSAR college students.
The scholars had been protesting towards having the CJI as chief visitor for his or her convocation following his oral feedback in courtroom evaluating youths to ‘cockroaches’ and ‘parasites’. The petition mentioned the BCI letters had created a chilling impact on the liberty of speech and the liberty of affiliation amongst college students.
Mr. Mishra mentioned letters issued to NALSAR and State Bar Councils had been withdrawn “inside one hour”. He mentioned there was no cause for additional reason for motion, and the controversy must be given a quietus.
Nonetheless, the courtroom agreed with Mr. Parameshwar that the courtroom ought to shield college students sooner or later towards any such violation of their rights by our bodies appearing with out jurisdiction. Such a state of affairs ought to by no means come up, the senior counsel mentioned.
It clarified that solely the guardian college or the competent authority below the regulation has disciplinary energy over college students.
The Bench mentioned the August 13 letters of the BCI had been “out of date”.
Revealed – September 03, 2026 01:24 pm IST
