The Supreme Court on Friday orally observed that the Bar Council of India (BCI) should not intervene in matters of legal education and should instead leave such issues to academicians and jurists.
Justice Surya Kant made this remark while dismissing the BCI's challenge to a Kerala High Court ruling, which had permitted two individuals convicted of murder by a trial court to pursue legal education online from jail.
"First of all, speaking for myself - and I will persuade my brother also - the BCI has no business to go into legal education...Legal education should be left to the jurists, to legal academicians. Have mercy on the legal education of this country," Justice Kant remarked during the hearing.
Justice Surya Kant also noted that both convicts had already secured admission to law schools. He questioned the BCI's opposition, asking what would happen if the convicts were later acquitted on appeal.
The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh, ultimately dismissed the BCI's appeal against the Kerala High Court’s ruling. The dismissal was based on both the delay in filing the challenge (as the November 2023 judgment was contested only this month) and the appeal's lack of merit.
The Kerala High Court ruling under challenge was delivered in November 2023 by Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Dr. Kauser Edappagath.
The life convicts had cleared the entrance examination for the LL.B. course conducted by the Kerala Law Entrance Commissioner for the 2023-24 academic year and sought interim bail to pursue their studies.
During the High Court proceedings, the BCI’s standing counsel argued that only candidates who complete a regular LL.B. course from a recognized university are eligible for enrolment as advocates. Meanwhile, the principals of the colleges where the convicts secured admission stated that they would permit online attendance if directed by the Court.
On November 3, the High Court ruled that the convicts be allowed to attend their law courses online. It further stated that they could be granted interim bail if their physical presence was required for practical training or examinations.
“A convict is entitled to basic human rights and has the right to live with dignity in jail. The prisoners’ right to education is a human right grounded in the right to dignity. A prisoner has as much a right to pursue study as a person free from the confines of jail," the High Court had reasoned in its ruling.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy