Top News

The Supreme Court on Friday strongly criticised the directions issued by Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra, which were later withdrawn, seeking to stop the enrolment of NALSAR University students over their protest campaign against the Chief Justice of India.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said students have the right to peacefully protest and questioned why the BCI had intervened in the matter.

“BCI is unnecessarily taking action. If the students have a cause to protest, they have the right to protest. Students might have written a letter to me. It's a dialogue between students and me. Who are they (BCI) to unnecessarily raise an issue? This is totally uncalled for. BCI has nothing to do with this,” the CJI said.

He added, “I myself, during student days, was involved in student activities. Peacefully they are raising voice, they should be allowed. Even if they are wrong, assuming, they have the right to protest. Who can stop them? So long as they are lawfully and peacefully raising a voice, they must be heard. Why Bar Council or any other body should interfere?”

“Even if during the young days someone makes a statement which is wrong, let that be wrong, but why should there be an action,” CJI Surya Kant said.

Supreme Court Questions BCI’s Role

The CJI made the observations after Senior Advocate K Parameshwar orally mentioned a writ petition challenging the BCI Chairperson's directions.

Although the directions were subsequently withdrawn, Parameshwar submitted that the cause of action still survives. He also raised questions over the manner in which the BCI Chairperson had issued the directions.

According to Parameshwar, there was no mention of any Council meeting authorising the BCI Chairperson's actions. He also pointed out that a BCI member from Kerala had already opposed the move.

“The functioning of the Bar Council itself is a serious issue,” Parameshwar submitted.

Advocate Radhika Gautam, appearing for the BCI, informed the court that the decision in question had been withdrawn.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi, who was also part of the Bench, questioned the circumstances in which the decision had been taken.

“Was BCI convened to take a resolution like that? We want to know,” Justice Bagchi asked.

No Punitive Action Against NALSAR Students, Faculty

Accepting Parameshwar's oral mention, the Bench took the petition on board.

The court passed an interim order stating that no punitive action shall be taken against NALSAR students or faculty at the instance of the BCI or any Bar Council over the incidents referred to in the BCI Chairperson's letters, which concerned the campaign against the CJI's participation in the convocation.

CJI Invites NALSAR Students To Supreme Court Bar

After dictating the order, CJI Surya Kant said he welcomed NALSAR students to join the Supreme Court Bar.

“You tell the students, get the license at the earliest. Join the Supreme Court bar. We will empanel them for legal aid cases, and let them do legal aid. This will be the befitting answer to all those who caused impediment in their career,” the CJI said.

What Is The NALSAR Petition About?

The petition was filed by two NALSAR alumni, Mihira Sood and Abhishek Tiwari, challenging the letters issued by the BCI Chairperson.

The petition sought to challenge the BCI chief's call for an inquiry into the students' campaign against the CJI and the move to suspend their enrolment.

The petitioners have argued that the BCI does not have statutory authority to conduct an inquiry into the university's internal affairs or impose a pre-emptive restriction on the enrolment of law graduates.

They have further contended that Section 24A of the Advocates Act contains a finite list of grounds for disqualification from enrolment, and that participation in a student campaign or the pendency of a university inquiry does not fall among those grounds.

The petitioners have urged the Supreme Court to quash both BCI letters, order an inquiry into the manner in which they were issued, and restrain the BCI from taking disciplinary, civil or criminal action against NALSAR students or faculty in connection with the matter.