Indian law students reject Chief Justice over police brutality dismissal

In mid-July, as police in Delhi were beating back student protesters with batons and teargas, a lawyer tried to bring the matter before India's Chief Justice. Surya Kant, according to media reports, told him not to waste the court's time. When asked to watch videos of the violence, Kant said the court didn't have time for that either. A day later, dozens of graduating law students from Nalsar University in Hyderabad sent an email to their university asking that the Chief Justice not be invited to their convocation ceremony. Within weeks, the demand had grown to include about 450 of the university's 1,400 students, and then students from a second premier law school, the National Law School of India University in Bengaluru, joined the call.

For law students, having the country's top judge preside over their passing-out ceremony is ordinarily an honor. But these students felt they could not accept a degree from someone who appeared indifferent to allegations of police brutality against unarmed young people. "We feel that receiving our degrees from a dignitary who appears dismissive of serious allegations of police brutality against protesting citizens sits uncomfortably with what we have been taught to value during our time at Nalsar," they wrote. The Chief Justice later clarified that he had not refused to hear the petition, only asked that it be filed properly. The Supreme Court has since begun hearing cases involving allegations of violence and concerns about police use of facial recognition technology against protesters.

But the anger did not subside. On a Thursday in August, the chairman of the Bar Council of India—the body that regulates lawyers—announced that no student from Nalsar would be allowed to enroll as a lawyer until further notice. He also demanded that the university identify which students had organized the campaign. The chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra, is a member of parliament from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party. The threat provoked immediate and fierce backlash from senior lawyers, law students, and the public. Even the Chief Justice himself pushed back, saying the students had every right to protest and that the Bar Council had no business interfering in what was a conversation between law students and him.

Within hours, Mishra reversed course. He announced that the Bar Council had decided to close the matter entirely, noting that the 2026 graduating class had played no role in any disturbance. In a letter addressed to "dear young friends," he apologized if his words or actions had hurt anyone's feelings. The apology came too late. Over the weekend, students and alumni from the National Law School issued an open letter saying they did not want Mishra at their convocation and that they stood with Nalsar in asking the Chief Justice to reconsider his attendance as well.

The Chief Justice responded on Sunday by saying he had never actually accepted the Nalsar invitation in the first place, so the question of his attendance was moot. But his statement is unlikely to end the controversy. The roots of the student anger run deeper, back to May, when Kant made an off-hand remark from the bench comparing unemployed young people to cockroaches and parasites. "There are youngsters like cockroaches, who don't get any employment and don't have any place in the profession," he said, adding that some become activists and "start attacking everyone." He later said the comment was taken out of context and aimed only at those with fraudulent credentials. The damage, however, was done.

The remark sparked the creation of the Cockroach Janta Party, an online satirical movement that grew into something far larger. Millions of students and young people signed up. Though not a formal political party, the CJP became the most serious challenge to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government in recent years, organizing weeks of protests in Delhi. The demonstrations centered on demands for education reform and accountability for repeated exam paper leaks. The police response was severe. Officers and paramilitary forces attacked unarmed students with wooden sticks and teargas. At least four young people were struck by pellet guns—the first time such weapons had been used for crowd control in the capital. The protests ended on July 25 after the education minister resigned, accepting moral responsibility for the exam failures.

What began as a single remark from the bench has now fractured the relationship between India's highest court and the country's law students. The convocation boycott is not simply about a ceremony. It is a statement about what law students believe their profession should stand for—and a judgment that the Chief Justice has fallen short. As the dispute continues to unfold, it reveals a widening gap between the judiciary and a generation of young lawyers who came of age watching their peers beaten in the streets while the country's top judge said he had no time to listen.