Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra has issued an apology to law students following criticism over the BCI's handling of the controversy surrounding Chief Justice of India (CJI) Justice Surya Kant's participation in the 2026 convocation of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad.
Mishra issued the apology in a letter on Independence Day, acknowledging that recent developments and statements connected with the controversy may have hurt the feelings of law students. The apology came after strong reactions from students at NALSAR University of Law and the National Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bengaluru.
“If anything connected with the present controversy, any of my words, or letter, has hurt the feelings of our law students, I sincerely regret and apologise for the same,” Mishra said, adding that expressing regret should not be viewed as a matter of prestige or ego, but as an acknowledgement that the concerns and feelings of students matter.
The controversy erupted after the BCI, on August 13, issued an order directing a halt to the enrolment of the NALSAR 2026 graduating batch following a campaign by students objecting to CJI Justice Surya Kant's participation as the chief guest at their convocation.
The decision triggered criticism from sections of the legal fraternity and students. The BCI subsequently withdrew the order within hours.
The episode prompted the NALSAR Student Bar Council to demand a public apology from the BCI Chairperson over the manner in which the matter was handled. Students, graduating students and alumni of NLSIU also issued a joint statement making a similar demand.
The controversy also extended to NLSIU's own convocation, with students expressing opposition to the proposed presence of the BCI Chairperson and the CJI.
In his latest communication, Mishra described students of National Law Universities as among the country's most informed and discerning young citizens.
He said their conduct and choices are closely observed within the legal education system and can influence how students of other Centres of Legal Education respond to similar issues.
Mishra noted that today's law students would go on to become advocates, senior advocates, teachers, scholars and judges, with some potentially occupying the highest positions in India's legal and judicial institutions.
He therefore stressed that decisions taken by students can have significance beyond a particular event or controversy.
The BCI Chairperson also acknowledged the legitimacy of peaceful protest and disagreement in a constitutional democracy.
At the same time, he appealed to students to reconsider their positions objectively and with an open mind if additional facts or clarifications emerge.
His remarks came against the backdrop of the student campaign concerning the participation of CJI Justice Surya Kant in the NALSAR convocation.
Mishra also emphasised the importance of allowing students to make their own decisions regarding participation in convocation ceremonies.
Describing convocation as a special occasion that cannot easily be recreated, he said the decision to participate or not ultimately belongs to the students.
“No student should be compelled to attend, and no student should feel compelled to abstain,” Mishra said, urging students to make their decision independently after considering the matter in its entirety and according to their own judgment.
Mishra further appealed that the controversy should not be allowed to acquire a political or extraneous colour through outside influence.
He called for the dispute to be resolved through fairness, dialogue and a spirit of reconciliation.
The apology marks a significant shift in tone following the BCI's August 13 action against the NALSAR graduating batch and its subsequent withdrawal of that decision within hours. The episode has also brought renewed attention to the relationship between the regulatory Bar body and students of India's leading National Law Universities.
The controversy underscores broader questions surrounding the right of law students to express disagreement, the autonomy of legal education institutions and the role of the BCI in matters concerning enrolment and the legal profession.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy