The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a petition seeking a CBI investigation into the alleged assault of lawyers who had gathered at the Bar Council of India (BCI) premises last month to protest against its Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra, directing the petitioners to approach the Delhi High Court instead.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana permitted the lawyers to withdraw their petition and move the jurisdictional High Court. The Registry was directed to return the original paper book to facilitate the filing of proceedings before the High Court.
The petition concerned an incident allegedly involving 20 to 25 lawyers who had assembled at the BCI premises on August 21 to protest against Mishra. According to the petitioners, they were assaulted by persons claiming to be lawyers, with the incident allegedly captured by CCTV cameras installed at the premises.
CBI Probe and Preservation of CCTV Footage Sought
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who mentioned the matter before the Bench, submitted that the petitioners wanted an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation and an immediate direction to preserve the CCTV footage.
Bhushan argued that the Supreme Court could take up the petition since it was already dealing with other matters concerning the BCI. The Bench, however, found that the Delhi High Court was the appropriate forum to consider the allegations.
Bhushan also referred to a statement allegedly made by Mishra following the incident, submitting that the BCI Chairman had described the protesters as “legal cockroaches” and had spoken about lawyers coming and driving them away after beating them.
The lawyers’ protest against Mishra followed controversy over his recent order barring the enrolment of students belonging to NALSAR Hyderabad’s 2026 batch because of their campaign against the CJI. That decision was subsequently withdrawn following criticism from within and outside the legal fraternity.
Bench Questions Lawyers Resorting to Protest
During the proceedings, Justice Bagchi raised concerns over lawyers resorting to protests, observing that members of the legal profession belong to a disciplined community with established mechanisms for seeking redressal of grievances.
The judge referred to principles laid down by the Supreme Court governing the conduct expected from lawyers as officers of the court, particularly in matters relating to the administration of justice. While citizens may exercise their right to protest, lawyers, Justice Bagchi indicated, are also governed by professional obligations and established avenues for addressing grievances.
The Bench said lawyers should approach the appropriate forum available under law instead of resorting to protest when a mechanism for raising their grievances already exists.
Bhushan maintained that regardless of whether the lawyers had been protesting, they could not have been physically assaulted. CJI Kant agreed with that proposition.
Petition Withdrawn to Approach Delhi High Court
The Supreme Court ultimately declined to examine the allegations itself, with CJI Kant indicating that entertaining the matter directly could create an impression that every such dispute was being taken up by the top court.
After the Bench made clear that the High Court was the proper forum, Bhushan agreed to withdraw the petition and pursue the matter there.
The Court accordingly directed its Registry to return the original paper book to the petitioners, enabling them to approach the Delhi High Court.
