The Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has clarified that he never accepted an invitation from the National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR) to attend its convocation as the chief guest, making it clear that there was consequently no question of his attending the event.
The clarification comes amid the controversy surrounding NALSAR’s decision to invite the CJI as the chief guest for its 2026 convocation. A section of students had objected to the invitation and urged the university to reconsider the decision.
According to the CJI, he had not consented to the invitation extended by the Hyderabad-based National Law University. His clarification effectively puts to rest speculation regarding whether he would attend the convocation in the wake of the opposition expressed by students.
The controversy has unfolded against the backdrop of a broader dispute involving NALSAR students and the Bar Council of India (BCI). The BCI had earlier issued directions concerning students who had participated in a campaign opposing the CJI’s proposed participation in the convocation. The move triggered considerable concern within the student community and was subsequently followed by an apology from BCI Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra.
The issue had also reached the Supreme Court, where CJI Surya Kant expressed disapproval of the action taken against the NALSAR students. The developments have consequently brought into sharp focus questions concerning students’ freedom to express disagreement, institutional autonomy and the appropriate limits of disciplinary action by professional regulatory bodies.
The latest clarification by the CJI is significant because it indicates that his participation in the convocation had not been finalised in the first place. His statement that he had never accepted the invitation means that the premise surrounding his proposed appearance at the university does not arise in the manner suggested during the controversy.
The episode has nevertheless generated a wider debate within legal education circles concerning the relationship between constitutional authorities, law universities and student dissent. The developments have also underscored the importance of preserving institutional spaces in which students can articulate disagreement without such expression being construed as an affront to constitutional or professional authority.
The controversy surrounding the NALSAR convocation comes at a time when the legal fraternity is closely watching the evolving relationship between law students, regulatory institutions and constitutional courts. The CJI’s clarification now provides a crucial factual context to the dispute: there was no accepted invitation and, therefore, no confirmed commitment on his part to attend the convocation.
The post CJI Surya Kant clarifies he never accepted NALSAR Convocation invitation, Says question of attending does not Arise appeared first on India Legal.