Judicial Pushback: The BCI-NALSAR Enrollment Dispute and Calls for Institutional Reform

The Bar Council of India recently reversed its attempt to block NALSAR University graduates from practicing law after significant pressure from the judiciary. This move, sparked by student activism, has led the Supreme Court to affirm the professional right to dissent while fueling demands for leadership term limits within the Council.

RMN News Legal Desk
New Delhi | August 14, 2026

The professional standing of the Bar Council of India (BCI) is currently under intense examination following a high-profile dispute involving recent law graduates. The conflict arose when the Council briefly attempted to prevent the 2026 graduating class of NALSAR University from entering the legal profession. This administrative action was a response to a student-led movement that objected to having Chief Justice of India Surya Kant speak at their graduation ceremony.

  Fundamental Freedoms: The Supreme Court underscored that the right to protest remains a fundamental liberty for law students, declaring the BCI’s interference over convocation choices unwarranted.

The students’ grievances originated from comments made by the CJI during a previous legal proceeding involving police behavior toward protestors. Manan Kumar Mishra, the BCI Chairman, initially argued that such dissent demonstrated a lack of respect for the judiciary, rendering the students potentially unfit for legal practice.

Also Read:

[ India Judicial Research Report 2025 ]

However, the Supreme Court took a different view, stating that the BCI had no authority to intervene in what was essentially a private dialogue between a guest and the student body. The court emphasized that the freedom to protest is a protected right and that the Council should not have interfered.

  Structural Reform: With Manan Kumar Mishra serving a record seventh term, the NALSAR row has catalyzed a legal push for mandatory term limits within the Bar Council of India.

Manan Kumar Mishra, who also serves as a BJP-nominated member of the Rajya Sabha, has been at the helm of the BCI since late 2014. Now serving an unprecedented seventh consecutive term, his lengthy leadership is being questioned.

In the wake of the NALSAR incident, legal advocates have approached the Supreme Court to request structural changes, specifically proposing fixed terms for the Council’s executive positions. Although the BCI quickly rescinded its enrollment ban after facing widespread criticism, the event has highlighted a growing debate regarding the boundaries of regulatory power.