Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Friday strongly criticised the Bar Council of India (BCI) over its intervention in a controversy involving students of the National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR), Hyderabad, saying students have a fundamental right to protest peacefully and lawfully.
A bench headed by CJI Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, directed the BCI to file its response within two weeks on a petition challenging the Council’s actions against the 2026 graduating batch of NALSAR.
The court also ordered that, pending further proceedings, no punitive or criminal action should be taken against students or faculty of any national law university or other university in connection with the matter.
‘They had no business to interfere’
The issue was mentioned before the bench by senior advocate K Parameshwar, who argued that the BCI had no authority to interfere in matters concerning a university and that its action violated students’ freedom of speech and expression.
Responding to the submission, CJI Kant said the BCI’s intervention was “absolutely uncalled for”.
“If students have a cause or a reason to protest, they have a right to protest. Nobody can stop them, and we will not allow this,” the Chief Justice said.
CJI Kant further emphasised that the matter was essentially between him and the students.
“The students have written a letter to me, and it is between me and the students. There is a dialogue between us,” he said.
The Chief Justice also referred to his own experience of participating in student activities and stressed that students should be allowed to express dissent as long as their protests remain peaceful and lawful.
“We have to be large-hearted. They should be allowed to speak. Even if they are wrong, they have a right to speak,” CJI Kant observed.
Supreme Court asks BCI to explain its action
The bench also questioned whether the BCI’s decision concerning the NALSAR students was actually taken at a properly convened Council meeting.
Justice Bagchi asked the BCI to address the issue in its response.
The Supreme Court also directed the BCI to ensure that the students’ enrolment was not delayed. CJI Kant asked senior advocate Parameshwar to convey to the students that they should complete their enrolment and take membership of the Supreme Court Bar Association.
BCI reverses decision on NALSAR students
The Supreme Court’s intervention came hours after BCI chairman Manan Kumar Mishra announced that the Council had decided to close proceedings against the entire 2026 graduating batch of NALSAR.
The BCI had initially directed State Bar Councils not to enrol the 2026 NALSAR graduates “till further orders”. It had also sought details of students allegedly involved in a campaign opposing CJI Kant’s participation as chief guest at the university’s convocation.
The Council subsequently modified its decision, saying that the vast majority of students were innocent and should not suffer for the actions of others.
On Friday, however, Mishra announced that the proceedings against the 2026 batch had been closed altogether, saying the students had no role in any disturbance or movement.
How the NALSAR controversy began
The controversy began after a section of NALSAR students objected to the decision to invite CJI Surya Kant as the chief guest for their convocation.
A representation was submitted on July 23 by 70 members of the outgoing LLB batch, with students from other batches subsequently expressing solidarity.
The students referred to remarks made by CJI Kant during proceedings concerning alleged police excesses during student protests in Delhi. They argued that the choice of convocation chief guest should reflect the university’s commitment to constitutional rights, access to justice and engagement with grievances.
The BCI’s initial intervention triggered criticism from sections of the legal community and students, eventually prompting the Council to reconsider its position.
Mishra, while announcing the closure of proceedings, advised students to maintain institutional decorum while exercising their right to express their views.
The Supreme Court’s order has now put a judicial restraint on punitive or criminal action against students and faculty in connection with the controversy, while the BCI has been asked to respond to the petition within two weeks.
