The Delhi High Court recently ruled that law students cannot be barred from exams due to insufficient attendance. This order prompts the Bar Council of India (BCI) to review its strict attendance norms, impacting law schools nationwide.
Court Directs BCI Review
The High Court’s judgment stems from a Supreme Court petition initiated a decade ago. The court urged the BCI to re-examine mandatory attendance policies, challenging traditional legal education practices across India.
Conflicting Regulatory Standards
The University Grants Commission (UGC) previously required 75% attendance. Since 2025 , its revised regulations allow higher education institutes to set their own minimums, supporting flexible learning modes.
The BCI maintains its 2003 Legal Education Rules, mandating 70% classroom presence per subject. A 5% relaxation is possible only in “exceptional circumstances,” at the institute head’s discretion.
Law Schools Begin Adapting
Following the Delhi High Court’s verdict, some law schools adjusted policies. National Law University (NLU) Delhi , within the HC’s jurisdiction, stopped detaining students. It now permits assignments to compensate for absences.
OP Jindal Global University (JGU) in Sonipat removed mandatory attendance for end-semester exams. Symbiosis International in Pune will implement remedial measures, aligning with the judgment.
Evolving Policies Across India
Some institutions explored less rigid policies before the judgment. Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU Mumbai) , strict until 2023 , now allows a 5% medical relaxation. MNLU Mumbai considers allowing fourth and fifth-year students one month of internship per semester.
NLU Jodhpur last year extended its summer break by two weeks, aiding students seeking internships.
Student Demands: Flexibility for Internships
Students demand clear “on duty” policies for extracurriculars and internships. Internships are crucial for career entry and pre-placement offers. Current “deemed presence” policies often fall short.
An MNLU Mumbai student reported only two deemed present days per semester for inter-college events. An NLU Delhi student highlighted limited “deemed presence” in lower classes, hindering vital mid-semester internships.
Varied Institutional Responses
Not all law schools relaxed policies. West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WBNUJS) Kolkata lacks internship absence norms; students push for relaxation without success. National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR) Hyderabad students also petition for changes like mental health breaks and online class options.
NALSAR VC Srikrishna Deva Rao limits Delhi HC jurisdiction to Delhi, stating BCI rule changes are needed for NALSAR review. Conversely, Allahabad University and Banaras Hindu University (BHU) Law Centre plan to display monthly attendance and notify parents for low attendance.
Debate: Discipline Versus Holistic Learning
The attendance debate reflects differing educational philosophies. Some faculty believe mandatory attendance ensures discipline, vital for competent legal professionals.
Others argue rigid policies hinder multi-dimensional learning. The Delhi High Court emphasized holistic legal education, citing practical training, moot courts, and internships as incompatible with strict attendance. A NALSAR student stated, “I have learned more from courts and internships than classrooms,” arguing forced attendance stifles free thinking. Yet, some students acknowledge structure benefits initial years, especially for young learners.