Unrest at the Bar: Demands Mount for BCI Chairman Manan Mishra's Resignation

A storm is brewing within the Bar Council of India (BCI), the apex regulatory body for lawyers in the country. Its long-serving Chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra, finds himself squarely in the eye of this tempest, facing vociferous demands for his resignation from within the Council itself and from other corners of the legal fraternity. It’s a truly precarious situation, with accusations ranging from alleged irregularities to controversial administrative decisions, all while a legal challenge to his prolonged tenure looms large in the Supreme Court.

The immediate spark for this public outcry seems to have ignited on August 22, 2026. On that fateful day, BCI Co-Chairman YR Sadashiva Reddy, a senior advocate himself, along with fellow BCI member Manoj Kumar Narendran from Kerala, penned letters formally demanding Mishra step down. Joining this chorus was Srinath Tripathi, another BCI member hailing from Uttar Pradesh. Their grievances, particularly Reddy's, are quite serious: he's openly alleged irregularities in appointments, the dubious diversion of Council funds, questionable financial dealings involving various law colleges, and a host of other governance issues that, frankly, cast a shadow over the BCI's operations.

However, if his critics expected a swift capitulation, they were mistaken. Just a day later, on August 23, 2026, Manan Mishra, who also happens to be a Senior Advocate and a BJP Rajya Sabha MP, unequivocally rejected these demands. He’s standing his ground, asserting he enjoys the backing of a solid two-thirds of the Council members. In a rather pointed counter-move, he even questioned Reddy's very standing, claiming Reddy is no longer a BCI member because he didn't contest the last state bar council elections in Karnataka. A direct hit, one might say, aiming to undermine the legitimacy of his accuser.

One incident, in particular, has really stirred the pot: the NALSAR University of Law controversy. Picture this: the 2026 graduating batch from NALSAR found themselves in a bizarre predicament. Following students expressing their opinions about their convocation, specifically objecting to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant being invited as the chief guest, Mishra’s office issued an unprecedented directive. It essentially barred these students from being enrolled as advocates. Naturally, this sent shockwaves through the legal academic community. Thankfully, the directive was withdrawn within mere hours, with Mishra even issuing a letter expressing regret. Yet, as YR Sadashiva Reddy was quick to point out, the damage to the BCI's reputation, its image in the public eye, was already done.

Beyond these immediate skirmishes, there’s a much deeper, more fundamental challenge to Mishra's authority: his tenure. Advocate Yogamaya MG has taken this fight to the highest court, filing a plea in the Supreme Court. The crux of her argument? BCI rules, she asserts, limit the chairman's tenure to a mere two years. Yet, Mishra has been at the helm, continuously, since November 2014, after first being elected in 2012 and returning after a brief absence. The plea even references a gazette notification from April 2025, which, quite astonishingly, extended his term all the way to 2030.

Mishra, predictably, has his own interpretation of the rules. He counters that the Advocates Act, 1961, the very foundation of the legal profession's governance, does not, in fact, prescribe a fixed tenure for the chairman. Furthermore, he points to a unanimous resolution adopted by the BCI Council in 2023, which specifically increased the chairman's tenure to five years. It seems to be a classic case of rule interpretation and power dynamics at play.

Adding another layer to this already complex narrative, the political arena has also weighed in. Saurav Das, a spokesperson for the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), has joined the chorus, publicly calling for Mishra's resignation. It’s clear this isn't just an internal squabble; it's a saga that's drawing wider attention and scrutiny.

As things stand in New Delhi, the Bar Council of India finds itself at a critical juncture. With allegations swirling, a high-profile controversy still fresh in memory, and the very legality of its chairman’s extended term being questioned in the Supreme Court, the path ahead for Manan Kumar Mishra, and indeed for the BCI, appears fraught with challenges. One can only wonder how this intricate dance of power and principle will ultimately resolve itself.