'Who are they to…’: CJI Surya Kant criticises Manan Mishra — A timeline of BCI vs NALSAR row

The Supreme Court and Chief Justice of Surya Kant criticised the Bar Council of India's (BCI) action against the 2026 law graduate of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. CJI Kant was quoted by PTI as saying on Friday, "It's a dialogue between students and me." He asked, "Who are they [BCI] to interfere?"

The Supreme Court sought a response from the BCI to a plea filed by NALSAR against two Circulars issued by the BCI yesterday that received major backlash.

A bench led by CJI Surya Kant said that if students want to protest lawfully, BCI had no business to interfere. The court has agreed to hear the plea.

The CJI reportedly said, "The BCI has nothing to do with this. We are with you. Students have written a letter to me. It's a dialogue between students and me. Who are they to unnecessarily issue a circular? When I was in college, I was even actively involved in students' activities. Sometimes, even if they are saying the wrong thing, if they are lawfully raising a voice, it must be allowed."

The reaction came after Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra volte-faced on his Thursday's order, directing State Bar Councils not to enrol any 2026 NALSAR graduate as an advocate until further orders. Following a controversy over the matter, Mishra clarified on Friday that an order issued concerning judicial internships has been completely withdrawn.

What was the controversy? Why had BCI's Mishra imposed a ban on the enrolment of the NALSAR Students with the State Bar Council? Why did it revoke the ban later? Here's all you need to know:

July 23: Section of NALSAR students objects to CJI Surya Kant

A section of the students of Hyderabad-based NALSAR University of Law wrote to the Vice-Chancellor, Registrar and professors of the institution, opposing any proposal to invite Chief Justice of India Surya Kant as the chief guest to the varsity's convocation ceremony. News agency PTI reported about it on August 9.

The report cited an email communication sent on July 23 wherein some of the students of 2026 batch at the university reportedly said their concern arises from the refusal of the Supreme Court Bench led by the CJI to allow urgent listing of a plea concerning the alleged brutal police action against protesters during the peaceful 'Chalo Sansad' demonstration at Jantar Mantar on July 20.

They cited the CJI's reported remark that the Bench “was not interested in watching videos” when counsel offered video evidence of the alleged excesses.

ttps://www.livemint.com/news/india/hyderabadbased-nalsar-students-urge-university-not-to-invite-cji-surya-kant-as-convocation-chief-guest-heres-why-11786331921442.html

August 13

6:30 pm: BCI halts enrolment of NALSAR 2026 graduates

Four days after the reports about NALSAR students' objection to CJI Kant surfaced, the Bar Council of India directed State Bar Councils not to enrol any 2026 law graduate of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, as an advocate until further orders.

At 6:30 pm on Thursday, August 13, the Bar and Bench shared a letter by the BCI, which sought a factual report identifying those behind the campaign over CJI Surya Kant’s participation in the University’s convocation. Bar and Bench reported that a final decision on the matter would be taken on August 19.

BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra then said the Council had taken note of reports and material in the public domain regarding an organised campaign at NALSAR relating to the proposed participation or invitation of the Chief Justice of India in connection with the university's convocation.

According to PTI, the BCI specifically directed the university to identify, on the basis of verifiable material, persons who were principally involved in initiating, drafting, circulating, coordinating or mobilising the campaign. It asked the Vice-Chancellor to furnish an authenticated factual report within three days.

The BCI had, however, clarified that the participation in an aforementioned representation or campaign by itself would not automatically mean disqualification from enrolment.

It said a distinction must be maintained between persons who merely signed or supported a representation and those who organised or coordinated the campaign or proposed or mobilised an actual boycott, obstruction or disruption.

The Council had maintained that any final adverse decision would be taken in accordance with the Advocates Act, 1961, the applicable rules and principles of natural justice.

The BCI's move drew criticism from Opposition leaders and leaders of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) which led the mass protests at Jantar Mantar. Delhi, against NEET paper leak in June-July.

7:43 pm: CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke quipped over the BCI's action, asking, "What if all legal cockroaches come together?" In another post on X, he said, "Time for Manan Mishra isteefa do?"

8:18 pm: Another CJP leader Saurav Das released a statement saying, "Manan Mishra's accountability will be fixed." He condemned the the Bar Council of India’s decision to halt the enrolment of NALSAR’s 2026 graduating students as advocates.

"Students cannot be collectively penalised for expressing dissent over a ceremonial invitation. The Cockroach Janta Party condemns this order. If Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra does not withdraw this order immediately, then all law students, advocates, senior lawyers, and well-meaning young cockroaches will protest outside Bar Council’s office and Mishra’s official residence, and their respective states," Das said posted on X.

8:50 pm: BCI lifts enrolment bar on NALSAR 2026 graduates

Within three hours, the Bar Council of India (BCI) modified its earlier direction restricting the enrolment of 2026 graduates of NALSAR University of Lae with State Bar Councils, saying that all NALSAR students will now be entitled to enrol with the State Bar Council of their choice.

In a communication dated August 13, 2026, signed by BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra, the Council said it had "thoroughly discussed and deliberated" on the earlier communication issued the same day concerning the factual inquiry and enrolment of NALSAR's 2026 passed-out students.

"Accordingly, the Council modifies the order of the Chairman with regard to the ban on the enrolment of the NALSAR Students with the State Bar Councils. All the students will be entitled to get enrolled with the State Bar Councils of their choice," the communication states.

The BCI, however, said it would await the inquiry report from the Vice-Chancellor of NALSAR before deciding what further action, if any, is required in the matter.

The Council also said it had received reports from "some reliable sources" that a handful of teachers and outsiders were instrumental in allegedly instigating the students. The BCI said further action would be taken after receiving the inquiry report from the Vice-Chancellor.

August 14: Mishra says 'no student should face any loss'

Speaking to ANI on Friday, Speaking to ANI, BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra also emphasised that the primary intention of the BCI is to ensure that no law student faces obstacles or losses while securing internships in the judiciary.

"An order was issued yesterday, but the Council's meeting was held immediately. The Council discussed it and said, 'No, there is no need for this'. Actually, the intention is that no student should face any loss in getting an internship in the judiciary. Sometimes, we have seen in the past that due to certain reasons, the judiciary posed obstacles for students regarding internships," he said.

"There will be no inquiry; there will be no inquiry whatsoever, nothing of the sort will happen. We have wished the students well for their bright futures," he said while clarifying complete withdrawal of judicial internship order on Friday.

What does BCI's latest decision mean?

The BCI's latest decision means that NALSAR's 2026 graduates can proceed with their enrolment before the State Bar Councils of their choice, while the factual inquiry into the controversy surrounding the convocation-related campaign will continue.

On Thursday, the Council made it clear that the 2026 graduates as a whole should not be prevented from entering the legal profession merely because of allegations concerning the conduct of some individuals.

"No student shall be made to suffer without any fault on his part," the BCI said in its latest communication.

The Council will consider the matter further after receiving the Vice-Chancellor's report.