Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) co-convenor Saurav Das on Friday demanded the resignation of Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman Manan Kumar Mishra after Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant slammed the BCI for intervening in the NALSAR University of Law enrolment row.
“Moral responsibility commands that Manan Kumar Mishra resigns. Cockroaches both inside and outside courts should ensure this happens,” Das wrote on X.
Deep Dive
What led to the Bar Council of India freezing the enrolment of NALSAR's 2026 graduating batch?
Why did the Cockroach Janta Party demand Manan Kumar Mishra's resignation?
How did the BCI respond to the backlash after freezing the enrolment of NALSAR students?
CJI Kant slams BCI action
The chief justice said the Council had “no business” getting involved in the students’ right to protest. He also made it clear that the court would not permit students to be prevented from raising their concerns through lawful and peaceful protests.
{{/usCountry}}The chief justice said the Council had “no business” getting involved in the students’ right to protest. He also made it clear that the court would not permit students to be prevented from raising their concerns through lawful and peaceful protests.
{{/usCountry}}He also barred the BCI and all state bar councils from taking any punitive or criminal action against students or faculty members of any national law university or university in connection with the dispute, HT reported earlier.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court admitted a petition seeking directions to stop the BCI from issuing similar directives in the future and issued notice to the Council. A bench led by CJI Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, asked the BCI to submit its counter-affidavit within two weeks.
“The BCI is unnecessarily taking action in this matter. 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,” said the CJI after senior advocate K Parameshwar raised the issue before the bench.
Parameshwar said the BCI had “no business” dealing with matters inside a university and argued that its action infringed on the students’ fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. He said the BCI’s decision to withdraw its first letter freezing enrolment did not remove the cause of action against the Council. “It spells a lot about the functioning of the BCI,” Parameshwar said.
The CJI responded: “We are with you. This is absolutely uncalled for. They had no business to interfere. The students have written a letter to me, and it is between me and the students. There is a dialogue between us.”
BCI halts enrolment, then withdraws order
In its first order, BCI Chairman Mishra directed all state bar councils not to enrol any 2026 law graduate from NALSAR University as an advocate until further orders.
The BCI issued the order after a section of NALSAR students objected to the proposed participation of CJI Kant as the chief guest at the university’s convocation.
The students raised objections over remarks made by CJI Kant in the Supreme Court while hearing a plea concerning alleged police excesses against protesters during the student demonstration at Jantar Mantar on July 20.
They referred to CJI Kant’s reported comments that the bench was not interested in watching videos when the lead counsel offered to show footage of the alleged police excesses during the July 20 protest.
The BCI’s first order also directed the university to submit an authenticated report identifying those who had started, organised, coordinated or mobilised the campaign opposing the CJI’s proposed participation in the convocation.
Hours after issuing the directive, the Bar Council of India withdrew the order following a backlash on social media, including from the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Vikas Singh, and a threat of protest by CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke.
The BCI initially said its factual inquiry into the controversy would continue, but later reversed this decision as well.