Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra has apologised to law students after a sharp backlash over his remarks and an order targeting NALSAR University’s 2026 graduates in the row over inviting Chief Justice of India Surya Kant to the convocation.
In an Independence Day letter, Mishra said if anything connected with the controversy, including any of his words or letters, had hurt the feelings of law students, he “sincerely regret[s] and apologise[s] for the same”. He described law students, especially those at National Law Universities and other leading centres, as among the “most informed and discerning young citizens” who are capable of applying independent minds and do not need others to decide for them.
The controversy began after a section of NALSAR students urged the university to reconsider inviting CJI Kant as chief guest, citing concerns over his recent remarks and conduct in proceedings related to alleged police excesses against protesters. On August 13, the Bar Council of India issued a direction to all State Bar Councils not to enrol any 2026 passouts from NALSAR, alleging that a “handful of teachers and outsiders” had instigated “innocent students”. The order was withdrawn within hours after widespread criticism, with the BCI clarifying that the vast majority of students were innocent and that all 2026 graduates would be free to enrol with the State Bar Council of their choice.
The NALSAR Student Bar Council had earlier sought an apology from the BCI Chairperson, arguing that attributing student dissent to “outsiders” denied students ownership of their political views and reflected a patronising “anti-national” narrative that treats dissent as manipulation rather than engaging with it on merits. The council said the right to dissent legitimately and lawfully is integral to the freedoms under Article 19(1)(a) and alleged that the Chairperson’s actions were unbecoming of his office and contrary to constitutional principles he is expected to uphold.
In his August 15 letter, Mishra emphasised that the relationship between the judiciary, the Bar, universities and law students is deeper than any temporary controversy and urged that the issue be considered with fairness and a spirit of reconciliation without acquiring a political or extraneous colour through outside influence.