BCI bars enrolment of NALSAR graduates, later withdraws order

What happened: BCI orders an enrolment halt for NALSAR 2026 graduates, then withdraws it

The Bar Council of India (BCI) directed State Bar Councils not to enrol graduates of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad for the 2026 batch. After issuing the instruction, the BCI withdrew the enrolment-stoppage order within hours.

The reported sequence of BCI’s communications included: The BCI’s initial communication asked State Bar Councils to halt enrolment of NALSAR 2026 graduates pending further orders.The BCI’s action followed an inquiry connected to a student campaign opposing the participation of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant in NALSAR’s convocation.The initial communication was attributed to the BCI Chairman Ma’nan Kumar Mishra, directing State Bar Councils to hold enrolment pending further orders.After withdrawal, the BCI stated that NALSAR 2026 graduates would be allowed to enrol with their preferred State Bar Council.The BCI stated that it would wait for an inquiry report from the NALSAR Vice-Chancellor before deciding any further steps.The BCI’s updated statement emphasised that no student should be penalised without fault on their part.

Background and earlier position: BCI inquiry linked to a convocation controversy and student protests

The reported BCI inquiry linked the NALSAR convocation controversy to student opposition and associated proceedings. Students opposed the proposed participation of Justice Kant as a chief guest at NALSAR’s convocation, and the dispute included citations of remarks connected to alleged police excesses against NEET protesters in the national capital.

In the earlier stage of the BCI’s regulatory action, the BCI sought information from NALSAR, including: An authenticated report from the NALSAR Vice-Chancellor.Identification of individuals principally instrumental in initiating, organizing, coordinating, and mobilizing the campaign.Details of campaign representation and signatories.BCI’s framing that disrespectful conduct towards the highest judicial office could be treated as a liability for advocacy, teaching, or judicial roles.A stated intent to take a final decision after receiving the Vice-Chancellor’s report, with the earlier communication naming August 19, 2026 as the decision date.