The Supreme Court asked the Bar Council of India whether it had challenged the Delhi High Court ruling that law students cannot be detained from examinations or academic progression solely due to shortage of attendance.
Supreme Court Questions Delhi High Court Ruling On Law Student Attendance
The Supreme Court today expressed concern over a Delhi High Court judgment that allowed law students to continue their studies despite shortage of attendance.
A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta heard a PIL filed by two final-year students of NALSAR University of Law.
The petition challenges circulars issued by the Bar Council of India in September 2024. The circulars require students to undergo criminal background checks, submit declarations about simultaneous degrees or employment, and comply with attendance rules before enrolling for legal education or practice.
Supreme Court Questions BCI
During the hearing, Justice Vikram Nath asked Advocate Radhika Gautam, appearing for the BCI, whether the Delhi High Court judgment had been challenged.
Justice Nath said the ruling had created “chaos” for National Law Universities.
The Bench asked the BCI counsel to examine the judgment. The Court also indicated that it may examine the ruling even if the BCI does not file an appeal.
Attendance Issue Linked To Biometric Verification
The Court was informed that the attendance dispute is connected to the issue of biometric attendance in the present case.
The BCI sought time to obtain instructions. The Supreme Court then listed the matter for hearing next week.
Delhi High Court’s 2025 Ruling
In November 2025, the Delhi High Court ruled that recognised law colleges and universities should not stop students from taking examinations due to shortage of attendance.
The High Court heard a suo motu case linked to the suicide of a law student in 2016.
The case began after a friend of the student wrote to the then Chief Justice of India. The letter alleged harassment by the college and faculty members over low attendance.
High Court Favoured Flexible Attendance Rules
The Delhi High Court observed that strict attendance rules should not cause mental trauma to students or contribute to suicides.
The Court also directed the BCI to reconsider mandatory attendance rules for three-year and five-year LL.B. courses.
According to the High Court, the review should follow the National Education Policy 2020 and the 2003 UGC Regulations, which support flexibility in education.
Single Bench Followed Earlier Judgment
The Division Bench judgment was neither stayed nor modified. As a result, a Single Bench of the Delhi High Court passed a similar order in January 2026.
The Single Bench allowed writ petitions filed by several students of the University of Delhi.
The Court held that shortage of attendance could not stop students from appearing in examinations or continuing their studies.
The petitioners were LL.B. students. The university had barred some students from semester examinations. It had also withheld results of students who failed to meet the mandatory 70% attendance requirement.
The Single Bench relied on the November 2025 Division Bench judgment and held that it remained binding.
