The controversy stems from a campaign started by around 450 out of NALSAR’s 1,400 students against inviting Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant to the university convocation. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)The Student Bar Council, which is the elected student body at NALSAR University of Law, has condemned the Bar Council of India for first issuing the now-withdrawn ban on the outgoing NALSAR batch of 2026 and demanded an apology from BCI chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra for “objectionable comments” against students and faculty.The controversy stems from a campaign started by around 450 out of NALSAR’s 1,400 students against inviting Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant to the university convocation. The BCI on Thursday directed all state bar councils not to enrol any 2026 graduate from NALSAR University of Law as an advocate until further notice – but as criticism mounted, Mishra soon withdrew the diktat.The student body’s letter was issued late on Friday. “We acknowledge the rescission of the (BCI) letters and the extinguishment of the cause of action. However, even then, it is important for us to record our condemnation of this event at four levels: statutory, constitutional, first principles, and in light of the wider social realities of repression and unfreedom,” it states.Explained | NALSAR row: Can Bar Council of India stop enrolment of law graduates?“We reject the notion that constitutional fidelity requires silence… No institution, including the Supreme Court and the CJI, are beyond legitimate scrutiny in a constitutional democracy, and judicial accountability is not the antithesis of judicial independence but one of its essential safeguards. Universities exist to cultivate these values, to nurture independent thought, critical inquiry, and the courage to question authority. A university that cannot accommodate dissent ceases to be a university; a legal profession that fears criticism ceases to serve the Constitution,” it reads.The statement says that the BCI’s initial letter does not align with the council’s statutory functions. “The letter seeks to surveil the identities of virtually everyone involved in the alleged campaign, including its initiators, drafters, organisers, coordinators, mobilisers, spokespersons, social-media administrators, office-bearers of student bodies, faculty, research scholars, alumni, and external participants… asking for such details is an intrusive violation of privacy, considering that it involves revealing the identities of students, who may face potential long-term consequences,” it reads.The students pointed out that the language of the letters was highly objectionable because it talked of “groupism” and “dirty politics” within the University and the role of faculty in “misleading, misguiding and instigating students.” The students wrote, “These allegations are unprofessional, unfounded, and without any substance. Making such claims against members of the University family for mere peaceful expression of legitimate dissent is uncalled for and reeks of malice”.Opinion | We need lawyers who can say ‘no’ to power and still be allowed to practise lawThe students further wrote that BCI’s demands are in violation of “Article 19(1)(a) which explicitly states that all citizens will have the right to freedom of speech and expression”.Story continues below this adThe letter further read, “NALSAR is facing a defining choice: whether to acquiesce in the shrinking of democratic space or to affirm that universities are not extensions of the state, that regulators are not instruments for policing political opinion, and that constitutional freedoms do not become expendable when they are inconvenient. We owe that commitment not only to ourselves, but to all those who lack the privilege and visibility that we possess as part of an elite institution. The question is not whether dissent is comfortable; it is whether it will remain possible.”Nikhila Henry is an Assistant Editor at The Indian Express, based in Hyderabad. With a career spanning 17 years, she has established herself as an authoritative voice on South Indian affairs, specialising in the complex intersections of politics, education, and social justice. Experience & Career: Nikhila commenced her journalism career in 2007 as an education correspondent for The Times of India in Hyderabad,where she gained recognition for her coverage of student politics. Her professional trajectory includes a four-year tenure at The Hindu, where she focused on minority affairs and social welfare. In 2019, she took on a leadership role as the South Bureau Chief for The Quint, where she directed regional coverage across all five South Indian states. Her expansive career also includes a tenure at the BBC in New Delhi and contributions to prestigious international outlets such as The Sunday Times (London) and HuffPost India. Expertise & Focus Areas Nikhila’s reportage is marked by a deep-seated understanding of grassroots movements and institutional policy. Her core focus areas include: Regional Politics: Comprehensive analysis of the socio-political dynamics across South India. Education & Student Movements: Chronicling the evolution of Indian academics and the rise of youth activism. Minority Affairs: Rigorous reporting on the welfare, rights, and challenges facing marginalized communities. National Beat: Elevating regional stories to national prominence through investigative and on-ground reporting. Authoritativeness & Trust A respected figure in Indian media, Nikhila is not only a seasoned reporter but also an accomplished author and editor. She authored the critically acclaimed book The Ferment: Youth Unrest in India and edited Caste is Not a Rumour, a collection of writings by Rohith Vemula. Her dual background in daily news reporting and long-form authorship allows her to provide readers with a nuanced, historically-informed perspective on contemporary Indian society. Find all stories by Nikhila Henry here. ... Read More Tags:Bar Council of India (BCI)