Lawyers protest BCI chief Manan Mishra over NALSAR row in Delhi
Lawyers gathered outside the Bar Council of India demanding the resignation of chairman Manan Kumar Mishra in New Delhi, amid controversy over actions against NALSAR University of Law. The protest followed a BCI order and subsequent withdrawal regarding enrolment of NALSAR graduates.
Key takeaways
- A protest outside the BCI in New Delhi called for the resignation of Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra, organized by the All India Young Advocates Association and backed by allied groups.
- The demonstration followed controversy over a BCI order to freeze enrolment for NALSAR University’s 2026 graduates, which was later withdrawn after criticism.
- The Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, criticized the initial BCI action and supported students' right to protest, while cautioning against punitive measures.
- Lawyer welfare and the BCI’s use of official communications were highlighted by some demonstrators as areas needing accountability.
What Happened
On August 20, 2026, a group of lawyers staged a protest outside the Bar Council of India (BCI) office in New Delhi, demanding the resignation of BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra. The demonstration was organized by the All India Young Advocates Association and received support from the Cockroach Janta Party. Heavy police presence was reported near the BCI office as protesters raised slogans and held placards.
The protest occurred days after the BCI had issued an order affecting the enrolment of Hyderabad's NALSAR University of Law 2026 graduates, a move that drew criticism from parts of the legal community. The BCI later withdrew the order following criticism, stating that most students were innocent. The Supreme Court of India, represented by Chief Justice Surya Kant, questioned the BCI’s involvement and affirmed the students’ right to protest, while indicating that punitive action against NALSAR students or faculty was not appropriate.
Participants referenced Mishra’s long tenure and questioned his contributions to lawyer welfare, while reiterating calls for accountability within the apex body. Several speakers stressed that the protest was driven by the legal fraternity itself, even as political support flowed from allied groups.
Why It Matters
The episode highlights tensions within the BCI over its authority to regulate enrolment and the balance between institutional governance and civil rights of students and lawyers. The public dispute raises questions about leadership accountability in a national body that oversees legal practice in India, and it tests the response of federal and judicial voices to calls for reform within professional regulators.
Background
The controversy centers on a BCI order issued on August 13 directing State Bar Councils not to enrol NALSAR University’s 2026 graduating batch, following a student campaign linked to inviting the Chief Justice of India to the convocation. After criticism, the BCI withdrew the order, saying most students were innocent. Chief Justice Surya Kant later described the initial order as “absolutely unnecessary” and affirmed students’ right to peaceful protest while cautioning against punitive steps.
Key Facts
- Date and location: August 20, 2026, outside the Bar Council of India office in New Delhi.
- Organizers: All India Young Advocates Association; supporters included the Cockroach Janta Party.
- Demand: Resignation of BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra.
- Context: A BCI order on August 13 to freeze enrolment of NALSAR University’s 2026 graduating batch, later withdrawn.
- Judicial response: Chief Justice Surya Kant called the BCI order unnecessary and upheld students’ protest rights.
- Public statements: Protestors cited Mishra’s 14-year tenure and questioned his impact on lawyer welfare; some speakers referenced alleged use of BCI letters for political purposes.
What Happens Next
The sources indicate ongoing pressure from sections of the legal fraternity for accountability within the BCI. Specific next steps or scheduled actions beyond the August 20 protest are not enumerated in the provided materials.
Sources reviewed
Project Chintan independently synthesized and analyzed information cross-checked across the sources listed above.
Related stories
Supreme Court narrows IRC 2020 industry definition
Kerala HC Gives Govt 6 Weeks to Fill Waqf Board Vacancies
FDA suspends Mumbai club licence amid analogue paneer crackdown in Maharashtra
