the news now

The world's news, cross-checked among reputable sources.

Supreme Court Rules BCI Chairperson Manan Mishra is Pro Tem Until New Elections

3 sources · India

Who reported this

  • The Hindu India · Centre-left · Kasturi & Sons (family-owned)
  • The Indian Express India · Centre · Indian Express Group (Goenka family)
  • Hindustan Times India · Centre-right · HT Media (KK Birla group)

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.

Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.

Every source for this story reports from India.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra is serving only in a pro tem capacity until a freshly constituted body elects new office bearers. A three judge bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, directed that the Attorney General and Solicitor General must be consulted on all policy decisions in the interim to ensure institutional integrity. The ruling follows petitions challenging a 2025 notification that sought to extend the tenure of the chairperson and vice chairperson until 2030, despite BCI rules prescribing a two year term.

The court observed that the provision intended to prevent an administrative vacuum cannot be used to avoid elections or override statutes. Chief Justice Kant noted that concerns regarding the tenure would be resolved once elections are completed. Consequently, the court ordered Chief Justices of high courts to complete the co option of two women members to state bar councils within two weeks, with the newly constituted state councils required to elect BCI representatives within three weeks of that notification.

Beyond the tenure dispute, the court examined allegations regarding the BCI PEARL FIRST Trust. Petitioners raised concerns about a lack of financial transparency and the appointment of elected members as permanent managing trustees. Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned whether elected officials could name themselves perpetual trustees of a body created from the assets of a juristic entity. The court also referenced a recent controversy involving Mr. Mishra's aborted attempt to ban the professional enrolment of NALSAR University students who had protested the Chief Justice's presence at their convocation, an incident for which Mr. Mishra later apologized.

How each side framed it

Centre-left
Highlighted allegations of power concentration, financial irregularities, and the political affiliation of the BCI chairperson.
Centre
Focused primarily on the legal mechanics of the tenure dispute and the specific procedural directions issued by the court.
Centre-right
Emphasized the restoration of the statutory electoral scheme and the significance of the court's oversight following the NALSAR controversy.

Sources

100% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.