Bar Council of India leadership and regulatory dispute

Internal conflict emerged within the Bar Council of India (BCI) following demands from Co-Chairman YR Sadashiva Reddy for the resignation of Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra. Reddy alleged financial irregularities, including the diversion of approximately Rs 150 crore to a private trust, as well as irregular appointments and a lack of governance transparency. Mishra defended his position, characterizing the resignation calls as a ‘political vendetta’ and a ‘political stunt.’

The dispute escalated to the Supreme Court of India, which questioned the legal basis for Mishra’s tenure and a purported extension of his term until 2030. The Court ruled that the BCI will be reconstituted once newly elected State Bar Councils complete their statutory processes. While the current leadership may manage day-to-day operations, the Court implemented an oversight mechanism requiring the Attorney General and Solicitor General to be associated with all major policy decisions.

In a related development concerning NALSAR University of Law, the Supreme Court ruled that the BCI lacks the statutory authority to discipline law students or regulate their conduct, asserting that such control rests exclusively with educational institutions. This decision quashed BCI attempts to bar the enrollment of NALSAR’s 2026 graduating batch following student protests. Additionally, the Court directed advocates who alleged they were assaulted during a protest against the BCI Chairman to approach the Delhi High Court regarding requests for a CBI investigation.