The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the operation of a November 2025 Delhi High Court judgment, which had held that law students cannot be barred from appearing in examinations solely on the ground of shortage of attendance, observing that the National Law Universities were suffering due to the High Court’s decision.
Putting on hold the High Court judgment on a petition by the Bar Council of India challenging the 2025 judgment, a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta asked, “All the National Law Universities are suffering. No student wants mandatory attendance. Even those who have passed out are supporting the students.”
“Issue notices returnable on 21st July. In the meantime, the effect and operation of paragraph 249 of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed. However, the same shall be effective prospectively,” the Bench ordered.
The Court questioned the BCI over the delay in approaching the apex court against the High Court judgment. “Why did you come so late?” the Bench asked Manan Kumar Mishra, senior advocate and Chairman of BCI. BCI is the apex statutory body that regulates the legal profession and legal education in India.
BCI Chairman and Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra admitted that the delay was a lapse on their part.
During the hearing, the Court observed that several National Law Universities were facing difficulties after the High Court ruling and remarked that students were resisting the mandatory attendance. The Bench also noted that even former students appeared to be supporting the challenge to attendance requirements.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing in a related matter, said that the High Court judgment was effectively rewarding indiscipline among students who were not attending classes. In response, the Bench remarked that the judgment appeared to legislate on the issue and questioned whether it conferred a right upon students not to go to colleges.
The challenge before the Supreme Court arises from a batch of petitions assailing the November 2025 judgment of the Delhi High Court, which had ruled that students enrolled in recognised law colleges and universities could not be detained from examinations or denied academic progression solely because of inadequate attendance.
The High Court had issued the directions while disposing of a suo motu public interest litigation initiated after the 2017 suicide of law student Sushant Rohilla at Amity University. It was alleged that Rohilla had been harassed over low attendance and compelled to repeat an academic year in the BA LLB programme, circumstances which allegedly contributed to his death.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court had also sought a response from the BCI on a petition filed by NMIMS University challenging the same High Court judgment. The institution had argued that the ruling had opened floodgates of litigation by students seeking permission to sit for examinations despite attendance shortages, thereby undermining academic discipline and institutional autonomy.
The Court also said that it will hear a separate plea challenging biometric attendance systems in law colleges and posted the cases for hearing on July 21, 2026.