Archive · 4 Sep 2026
Supreme Court Bars Bar Councils From Disciplining Law Students
The Supreme Court considered whether the Bar Council of India could punish law students.
The case began after students at NALSAR objected to inviting Chief Justice Surya Kant to their convocation.
The BCI then told State Bar Councils not to enrol NALSAR’s 2026 graduates as advocates.
It also sought action or an inquiry related to the students’ protest.
The BCI withdrew its communications soon afterward, though reports differed on whether this took an hour, several hours, or up to 24 hours.
The Supreme Court ruled that the BCI and State Bar Councils cannot discipline students before they become advocates.
Universities must handle student conduct under their own rules.
The court also made permanent its earlier protection against punitive action toward NALSAR students and faculty.
The Supreme Court ruled that the BCI and State Bar Councils cannot discipline law students before they are enrolled as advocates.
The court said disciplinary authority over students belongs to their university or an authority designated by its rules or bylaws.
The ruling followed BCI action against NALSAR University students who opposed inviting CJI Surya Kant to their convocation.
The court declared the BCI’s August 13 communication and subsequent modified communications without legal authority.
Although the BCI withdrew its directions within hours, reports differed on the timing, and the court made its earlier protection for NALSAR students and faculty permanent.
- Who
- The Supreme Court of India, the Bar Council of India, State Bar Councils, NALSAR University of Law students and faculty, and alumni Mihira Sood and Abhishek Tiwari.
- What
- The court ruled that the BCI and State Bar Councils lack statutory authority to discipline law students before their enrolment as advocates.
- When
- The ruling was issued on September 3, 2026; the challenged BCI communications were issued on August 13, and interim protection followed on August 14.
- Where
- The dispute involved NALSAR University of Law in Hyderabad and proceedings before the Supreme Court of India.
- Why
- The case arose after NALSAR students opposed the proposed participation of Chief Justice Surya Kant as chief guest at the university’s convocation.
Petitioners and Supreme Court
Bar Council of India
Whether the case remained relevant
Petitioners and Supreme Court
The petitioners argued that withdrawing the communications did not remove the need to clarify the BCI’s legal authority or examine how the orders were issued. The court agreed that the legal question required clarification.
Bar Council of India
BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra argued that the communications had been withdrawn promptly and that the matter should be closed or given a quietus.
Who may discipline law students
Petitioners and Supreme Court
The petitioners and the court said disciplinary authority before enrolment belongs to the university or educational institution, not professional bar regulators.
Bar Council of India
The BCI intervened by directing State Bar Councils not to enrol NALSAR’s 2026 graduates and by seeking an inquiry, although it later withdrew those measures.
Student protest and free expression
Petitioners and Supreme Court
The petitioners said the dispute involved freedom of speech and expression across a university, rather than the conduct of only one student.
Bar Council of India
The BCI’s action followed allegations concerning a campaign by NALSAR students opposing Chief Justice Surya Kant’s proposed participation in the convocation.
- Legal basis
- The court said the Advocates Act, 1961, gives the BCI and State Bar Councils no express or implied power to discipline law students.
- Student disciplinary authority
- The parent university or an authority designated by its regulations or bylaws may take disciplinary action against enrolled students.
- BCI’s permitted role
- The BCI may prescribe and enforce standards of legal education under applicable laws and regulations.
- Challenged directive
- The BCI directed State Bar Councils not to enrol NALSAR’s 2026 graduates and sought action or an inquiry related to the controversy.
- Court’s finding
- The August 13 communication and subsequent modified communications were declared to have been issued without legal authority or jurisdiction.
- Withdrawal
- The BCI withdrew the communications after public criticism, with reports differing on whether the withdrawal occurred within an hour, within hours, or within 24 hours.
- Court protection
- The Supreme Court made absolute its August 14 interim direction protecting NALSAR students and faculty from punitive action.
Sources
BCI has no power to regulate students: SC on NALSAR row
NALSAR row: BCI, state bar bodies lack power to regulate law students’ conduct, says SC
NALSAR row - Top court says Bar Council of India has no power to discipline law students - Telegraph India
NALSAR controversy: SC says BCI has no statutory power to regulate law students' conduct, quashes two notifications
SC: BCI lacks power to discipline law students, universities rule
BCI has no statutory power to regulate conduct of students
SC says BCI, State Bar Councils cannot take disciplinary action against law students
