BCI Rift Deepens as Manan Mishra Faces Resignation Calls

• BCI Co-Chairman Y.R. Sadasiva Reddy has sought Manan Mishra’s resignation within 15 days.
• Reddy has alleged financial irregularities, including a ₹150-crore fund transfer to a private trust.
• Mishra has rejected resignation demands, saying he was elected and represents around 25 lakh lawyers.
• A Supreme Court plea has challenged his prolonged tenure as BCI chairman.

GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 23rd Aug: Pressure on Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra has intensified, with protests, a Supreme Court petition and an internal challenge from BCI Co-Chairman and senior advocate Y.R. Sadasiva Reddy adding to the controversy surrounding the legal regulator.

Reddy, in a six-page letter dated August 22, demanded Mishra’s resignation within 15 days and raised allegations relating to the functioning and finances of the BCI. He alleged that around ₹150 crore of BCI funds were transferred to a newly created trust, BCI Trust PEARL-First, and questioned the process through which the trust and its trustees were constituted. These are allegations made by Reddy and have not been established by an adjudicating authority.

Reddy also alleged irregular appointments within the BCI and criticised Mishra’s handling of the recent controversy involving NALSAR University of Law graduates. He argued that the BCI chairman’s office should not have been used to threaten an entire graduating batch with exclusion from enrolment over their views concerning the university’s convocation.

NALSAR row triggered controversy
The latest confrontation follows the BCI’s August 13 decision directing State Bar Councils not to enrol the 2026 graduating batch of NALSAR University of Law until an inquiry was conducted into students who had opposed the invitation to Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant for the university’s convocation.

The directive was withdrawn shortly afterwards following widespread criticism. Mishra subsequently apologised to students and said law students must remain free to express their views.

The episode drew criticism from sections of the legal fraternity. The Bombay Bar Association passed a resolution describing the action against the NALSAR graduates as an abuse of power and objecting to the manner in which the entire batch was initially targeted.

‘Will not step down’: Mishra
Mishra has rejected calls for his resignation. Responding to protests outside the BCI office, he said he was an elected representative and that his position was not the result of nomination or selection.

Mishra said he had been elected as BCI chairman multiple times and represented around 25 lakh lawyers. He argued that those seeking his removal should contest elections rather than pursue the matter through social media campaigns.

The BCI chief also objected to protesters describing lawyers as “legal cockroaches”, saying lawyers could not be characterised in such terms. The phrase was used by members of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), which backed protests demanding his resignation.

Supreme Court plea challenges tenure
The controversy has also reached the Supreme Court. Advocate Yogamaya MG, through advocate Deepak Prakash, has filed a petition challenging Mishra’s prolonged continuation as BCI chairman.

The plea relies on Rule 12(2) of the BCI Rules, which provides for a two-year term for the chairman and vice-chairman, subject to the rule’s conditions. It also challenges an April 2025 Gazette notification that purportedly extended Mishra’s tenure until 2030. The petition seeks his removal, fresh elections, a cumulative term limit and greater transparency in the BCI’s functioning.

The petition has additionally sought scrutiny of BCI finances, including the PEARL-FIRST trust and All India Bar Examination-related finances.

Protests add to internal pressure
Lawyers from different associations have held protests outside the BCI headquarters in New Delhi, raising concerns over Mishra’s long tenure, advocates’ welfare and proposed changes to enrolment-related fees. The demonstrations were organised by the All India Young Advocates Association, with support from the CJP.

The developments mark an increasingly public split within the country’s apex statutory body for legal regulation, with Mishra facing challenges both from outside the council and from senior office-bearers within it. The financial allegations raised by Reddy and the questions over Mishra’s tenure remain matters of contention and are subject to further legal or institutional scrutiny.