The Student Bar Council of Hyderabad-located NALSAR University of Law on Saturday condemned the Bar Council of India (BCI) over its earlier order which had directed the state bar councils to deter the enrollment of the graduates of the university’s 2026 batch as advocates. However, the order was withdrawn hours after its issuance, but still drew flak from both the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, and the students of the university.

The elected student body has voiced demands for an apology from BCI Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra over remarks it described as objectionable and directed at the university’s students and family members, according to a report by news agency PTI.

The students took exception to one of Mishra’s remarks, in which he said that ‘a handful of teachers and outsiders were instrumental in instigating innocent students.’ Notably, the BCI had issued the aforementioned directive on Thursday, but withdrew it soon after following widespread criticism.

Students question BCI’s authority

While the university’s Student Bar Council acknowledged that the letters had been withdrawn, it said the episode still raised statutory, constitutional and privacy concerns. The council argued that the BCI’s direction concerning the enrolment of NALSAR university graduates fell outside the regulator’s statutory functions.

Furthermore, it questioned the BCI’s instruction to the NALSAR Vice-chancellor to prepare an inquiry report.

As per the students, the letter sought details that could potentially blow the lid off the identities of the people involved in the campaign, including its initiators, student representatives, faculty members, research scholars, alumni and external participants.

The council called the demand intrusive, arguing that disclosure of students’ identities could expose them to potential long-term consequences.

Calls raised for apology

The council alleged that Mishra’s conduct was unbecoming of his position and was also inconsistent with the constitutional principles expected of the head of a statutory regulator. It further observed that a communication posted by Mishra on ‘X’ did not withdraw the allegations made against students and faculty members.

The council said, “We demand an apology from the BCI Chairperson for making such objectionable comments.” Moreover, the students maintained that no institution, including the Supreme Court (SC) and the Chief Justice of India, should be beyond legitimate scrutiny in a constitutional democracy.

They argued that judicial accountability was not inconsistent with judicial independence but an essential safeguard for it.

Students defend right to dissent

The Student Bar Council said universities must foster independent thinking, critical inquiry and the “courage to question authority”.

Citing a judgment made by the Supreme Court earlier, it maintained that the lawful right to dissent formed part of the freedoms guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

The council also highlighted Mishra’s dual role as head of a statutory regulator and a BJP Rajya Sabha member, alleging that attempts to identify people allegedly behind the student campaign appeared political in nature.