E-Paper
‘Sincerely regret, apologise’: Bar Council chief to students after CJI Kant's rap amid NALSAR row
“If anything connected with the controversy has hurt the feelings of our students, I sincerely apologise," Bar Council Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra said.
A day after Chief Justice of India Surya Kant came down hard on the Bar Council of India (BCI) for its intervention in the NALSAR University of Law enrolment controversy, BCI chairman Manan Kumar Mishra on Saturday apologised to the law students, saying he sincerely regretted if anything connected with the controversy, including his words or letter, had hurt their feelings.
In an Independence Day letter addressed to “my dear young friends”, Mishra said the developments of the past few days had caused “concern and anguish” among a section of the student community and acknowledged that whenever students felt hurt or aggrieved, their concerns deserved to be heard “with patience, sensitivity and respect”.
“If anything connected with the present controversy, any of my words, or letter, has hurt the feelings of our law students, I sincerely regret and apologise for the same,” Mishra said.
“There should be no hesitation in saying so. An expression of regret is not a matter of prestige or ego. It is simply an acknowledgment that the feelings and concerns of our students matter,” he added.
Also Read | 'Between me and students': CJI Surya Kant slams Bar Council move against protesters
The apology comes a day after CJI Kant told BCI that it had “no business” interfering in the NALSAR controversy and made it clear that students had a right to protest so long as their protests remained lawful and peaceful.
The bench, headed by CJI Kant and comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, had also restrained the BCI and all state bar councils from pursuing any punitive or criminal action against students and faculty of national law universities or other universities in connection with the controversy.
The court’s intervention followed the BCI’s dramatic reversal over the enrolment of the 2026 graduating batch of NALSAR, Hyderabad. The council on Thursday initially directed all state bar councils not to enrol the students “till further orders”. Hours later, it withdrew the freeze but retained an inquiry into allegations that some teachers and outsiders had instigated or misled students. On Friday, Mishra announced that the proceedings against the entire 2026 batch were being closed.
The latest letter goes further to put an end to the controversy, with Mishra stressing that law students must remain free to form their own views.
“Our law students, particularly those studying in the National Law Universities and other leading Centres of Legal Education, are among the most informed and discerning young citizens of the country,” Mishra said. He added that they study the Constitution, the Rule of Law, fairness and the importance of hearing all sides before reaching a conclusion and “do not require anyone to decide for them”.
Mishra also acknowledged the importance of dissent, saying peaceful disagreement, questioning and protest were “important features of a constitutional democracy” and that students “must always remain free to express their views”.
Also Read | Who is Manan Kumar Mishra? Bar Council Chair at centre of CJP's 'isteefa do' post, NALSAR row
At the same time, he said issues could be reconsidered when further facts or clarifications emerged. “There is no inconsistency between expressing a genuine grievance and thereafter fairly considering a clarification,” he said.
The BCI chairman also addressed the question of the NALSAR convocation, saying the decision whether to attend must ultimately remain with the students themselves. “No student should be compelled to attend, and no student should feel compelled to abstain,” he said, while appealing to them to take the decision independently after considering the matter in its entirety.
The controversy erupted after a section of NALSAR students objected to CJI Kant being invited as chief guest for their convocation this year.
Also Read | NALSAR student body condemns BCI over withdrawn enrolment order, seeks apology from chief
The students had cited remarks made by CJI Kant during proceedings concerning alleged police excesses during student protests in Delhi and questioned whether his invitation was consistent with NALSAR’s commitment to constitutional rights, access to justice and reasoned engagement with grievances.
The BCI had subsequently sought an authenticated report from NALSAR identifying those who had initiated, organised, coordinated or mobilised the campaign opposing the CJI’s participation in the convocation.
But the intervention triggered a backlash, culminating in Friday’s Supreme Court hearing.
When senior advocate K Parameshwar mentioned the matter, CJI Kant said: “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.”
Also Read | Cockroach Janta Party calls for Manan Mishra's resignation as CJI slams move against NALSAR batch
The CJI also drew upon his own experience of student activism, saying that so long as students were protesting lawfully and peacefully, “they have a right to raise their voice”.
“We have to be large-hearted. They should be allowed to speak. Even if they are wrong, they have a right to speak,” the CJI said.
The bench also questioned whether the BCI Council had actually been convened to take the decision concerning the NALSAR students, asking the council to explain the process in its response to the court.
The BCI chairman’s Saturday letter now seeks to emphasise reconciliation rather than confrontation.
“The relationship between the Judiciary, the Bar, Universities and law students is much deeper and more enduring than any temporary controversy,” Mishra said, adding that differences should ultimately be capable of resolution through “dialogue, clarification and mutual respect”.
He said the BCI regarded law students as the future of the legal profession and that their “dignity, independence of thought and legitimate concerns must always be respected”.
Mishra also appealed that the controversy should not acquire a “political or extraneous colour through outside influence” and said students were mature enough to examine the facts, consider the clarification offered and take their own independent decision.
“Let the students examine the matter themselves. Let every institution respect their independence of thought,” he said.
