BCI Chief and BJP’s Rajya Sabha MP Manan Mishra Faces the Heat as Supreme Court Orders SIT Probe into Assault on Lawyers

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to constitute a Special Investigation Team to probe an assault on advocates who were protesting against Bar Council of India Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra (who is also Rajya Sabha MP from ruling BJP) outside the statutory body's headquarters.

A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana passed the order while hearing a plea by victim lawyers seeking an independent probe. The assault occurred during demonstrations against Mishra following his controversial directive attempting to block law graduates from state bar enrolments over student protests against CJI Surya Kant’s invitation to university convocations.

Top Court Orders Senior Officer to Head Assault Probe

Directing swift action on the complaint lodged at the IP Estate police station, the bench mandated that the Special Investigation Team must be led by a senior officer of Deputy Commissioner of Police rank. The court also permitted the petitioners to file a parallel private complaint before the jurisdictional Metropolitan Magistrate.

The victim advocates approached the top court after the Delhi High Court rejected their plea for a Central Bureau of Investigation probe. Representing the petitioners, Advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that the Delhi Police operates under executive control, noting that BCI Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra is a Member of Parliament belonging to the ruling party.

Bhushan submitted that an independent agency like the CBI was necessary because the selection panel for the CBI Director includes the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India, ensuring greater institutional distance.

Flashpoint Sparked by Student Enrolment Directive

The protests against the BCI Chairman stemmed from a wider controversy that erupted when Mishra threatened to withhold law degrees and freeze advocate enrolments for 2026 graduating batches at institutions like NALSAR University of Law and NLSIU Bengaluru. The BCI directive was issued after law students opposed inviting CJI Surya Kant as a convocation guest.

Facing severe backlash from legal academics, student unions, and senior advocate bodies, Mishra subsequently walked back the enrolment ban and issued a public statement expressing regret. However, demonstrating lawyers assembled outside the BCI office on August 22 demanding his resignation over the regulatory overreach, leading to physical clashes where several advocates were beaten up by an opposing group.

Arguments Heat Up Over BCI Chairman’s Role

During the Supreme Court hearing, Bhushan alleged that the Bar Council failed to initiate professional misconduct proceedings against those who attacked the peaceful demonstrators. He argued that public remarks by Mishra emboldened the assailants and claimed the accused acted at his behest.

The bench pushed back against focusing the criminal investigation primarily on the BCI Chief without evidence showing his physical presence during the assault.

"You seem more interested in prosecuting the BCI Chairman than the assailants. He was never there at the site," Justice Bagchi remarked during the hearing.

Addressing Bhushan’s submission that two months had passed without an FIR being registered on the August 22 complaint, the bench clarified that an SIT report combined with magistrate proceedings would ensure a thorough investigation, including securing essential CCTV footage from the BCI office premises.

Dual Legal Route Established for Protesting Advocates

The Supreme Court emphasized that while the DCP-led SIT carries out an impartial factual investigation into the physical violence, the petitioners retain full statutory rights to present evidence directly before the Metropolitan Magistrate. CJI Surya Kant observed that the judicial magistrate holds complete jurisdiction to identify unknown assailants and take formal legal cognizance based on the final police report.