Back
CJAR Demands Immediate Resignation of BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Over NALSAR Directive
A Controversial Directive Sparks Outrage
On , Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra issued a unilateral directive instructing all not to enroll the 2026 graduating batch of , as advocates. The directive was ostensibly a response to student letters opposing the invitation of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant as Chief Guest for the convocation—a move linked to the CJI’s remarks on a Delhi student protest. Within hours, facing severe public backlash and criticism from bar bodies, Mishra withdrew the order. But the damage had been done.
CJAR’s Strong Rebuke
The has now demanded Mishra’s immediate resignation, calling the directive “utterly illegal and unconstitutional.” In a statement released on August 22, CJAR condemned the action as “an attempt at on an entire class of students over their campaign/letter.” Even after the withdrawal, CJAR noted, Mishra “has not expressed any real contrition for his blatantly intimidatory actions.”
CJAR explicitly endorsed the ’s resolution, which characterized Mishra’s order as “an abuse… of the office of the Chairman,” issued without affording students any . The Association had stated publicly that Mishra’s belated apology “cannot substitute for resignation.”
A Pattern of Unilateralism
The CJAR statement highlighted that Mishra “has been known to issue orders unilaterally misusing the letter head of the BCI without even calling a meeting of the Bar Council.” This latest incident is not an isolated lapse but part of a broader disregard for institutional process. CJAR argued that when a regulatory office-bearer threatens the careers of law graduates for exercising their right to protest and free expression, he “has clearly demonstrated unfitness to continue holding that office.”
Trust Issues and Inquiry
Beyond the NALSAR episode, CJAR raised serious concerns about Mishra’s continuing tenure. The provides for a two-year term for the BCI Chairman, with a proviso allowing continued office “until his successor is elected.” CJAR alleges this provision has been misused to entrench Mishra indefinitely, concentrating power in one person for over a decade.
Further, CJAR revealed that Mishra set up a trust under the BCI—the —naming himself a lifetime trustee. This trust took over funds from the earlier . “This taking over of the funds as well as their utilization is being enquired into by the ,” the statement said, adding to the calls for accountability.
Demands for Institutional Reform
CJAR has outlined six demands, including Mishra’s immediate resignation, a probe into his actions including the trust formation and opaque decision-making, enactment of a binding two-term limit on the office of BCI Chairman and Vice-Chairman, a transparent rotational mechanism for BCI leadership across States, full public disclosure of BCI’s finances and disciplinary record during Mishra’s tenure, and institutional safeguards to prevent future office-bearers from unilaterally penalizing students or advocates without .
A Call for Accountability
CJAR has called upon the legal fraternity, , and the to ensure that “accountability, rotation, and are restored to the BCI without further delay.” Notably, a challenging Mishra’s prolonged tenure and seeking an independent probe into the BCI Trust is already pending. At a recent BCI General Council meeting, one member explicitly sought Mishra’s resignation, and BCI Co-Chairman has also demanded his resignation.
“An , as the has repeatedly highlighted, is one of the best guarantees of ,” CJAR emphasized. The continuing presence of Mishra, who is also a MP from the , is viewed as damaging the independence of the Bar. With mounting pressure from within the legal community and ongoing investigative scrutiny, the demand for Mishra’s removal from the chairmanship has become a critical test for the credibility and independence of India’s legal regulatory framework.
