India’s legal education system faces urgent calls for major reforms, with top judges and parliamentary bodies criticizing the Bar Council of India (BCI), the primary regulatory authority. Justice Surya Kant, now Chief Justice of India, publicly questioned the BCI’s focus in April 2025. He urged the body to prioritize global recognition for lawyers over inspecting law colleges.
This judicial criticism is not isolated. Multiple expert groups have raised concerns about BCI’s role for years, recommending changes to its powers and structure.
Calls for Reform Mount
Since 2005, various national bodies have pushed for BCI reform. The National Knowledge Commission first scrutinized its functioning. A parliamentary standing committee in 2024 later recommended limiting BCI’s power to regulating only basic eligibility for practicing law.
Teachers and advocates also emphasize the need for BCI to adapt to the evolving legal profession. They advocate for including academics from diverse backgrounds in its governance. Currently, practicing advocates primarily lead the BCI. However, the BCI has consistently resisted major changes.
A law professor noted the profession’s rapid changes due to technology and globalization. They highlighted that BCI’s leadership has remained stagnant for over a decade. Manan Kumar Mishra has served as BCI chairman for seven consecutive terms, re-elected in March 2025. He also holds a Rajya Sabha seat, prompting concerns about political influence in professional bodies.
BCI’s Regulatory Powers
Modern legal education in India began with the 1855 Government Law College in Bombay. Early universities formally introduced law as a subject. After 1947, a rapid and unregulated expansion of law colleges occurred. The Advocates Act of 1961 established the BCI to standardize and regulate legal education.
The BCI mandated a shift from two-year to three-year law programs in 1962. It also prescribed curriculum changes. By 2008, BCI framed ‘Rules of Legal Education’ and formed a Curriculum Development Committee in 2010. Today, BCI oversees approximately 1,700 law colleges nationwide.
Originally, the Advocates Act of 1961 tasked BCI with promoting legal education and setting standards in consultation with universities and state bar councils. It also approved universities whose law degrees qualified students for advocacy. Over time, BCI gained almost complete control over legal education. The University Grants Commission (UGC) now requires BCI approval for universities to start law courses.
Legislative Hurdles to Change
Advocate Mohit Yadav pointed out that BCI’s regulatory power stems from the Advocates Act of 1961. Therefore, changes require legislative amendment. The union government drafted amendments to the Act in 2023 and 2025. Both bills, which included provisions for nominating BCI members, were withdrawn due to opposition from the BCI and lawyers.
Proposed Alternative Regulators
The parliamentary panel suggested establishing the National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER). This independent authority would operate under a proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) for postgraduate legal education and beyond. However, the latest HECI Bill 2025, named Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhisthan Bill, excludes legal and medical education from its scope.
Professor C Raj Kumar proposed NCLER include all stakeholders, chaired by the Chief Justice of India, with the BCI Chairman as member-secretary. Former NALSAR Hyderabad Vice-Chancellor Faizan Mustafa suggested a separate commission, similar to the Medical Commission of India.
Advocate Yadav emphasized the need to revamp the old structure. He stated BCI lacks the ability to provide professional training covering all aspects of modern law, including corporate law. Practicing advocates primarily compose BCI. Law educators, however, have no connection to litigation.
Advocate Kartikey Hari Gupta supports a mixed approach. He acknowledges BCI’s supervisory function but argues against its full control. He highlights the historical apprenticeship model of law and the need for academic insights into jurisprudence.
Inspection Powers and Revenue
The parliamentary panel noted a “reckless proliferation of substandard law colleges,” attributing it to BCI’s power to inspect and recognize institutions. It recommended prioritizing quality over quantity in college recognition.
Academics question the inspection process. Megh Raj, an assistant professor at Delhi University, argued BCI’s focus on legal education dilutes its primary function of regulating the legal profession. He suggested BCI earns revenue from regulating education, alleging permissions are granted to non-compliant colleges.
BCI charges substantial fees: Rs 50,000 for applications, Rs 3,00,000 to Rs 5,00,000 per course for inspection/approval, plus a Rs 5,00,000 refundable guarantee fee. Raj also criticized online inspections, questioning their effectiveness in ensuring compliance. The five-year integrated law program at Delhi University received approval following an online inspection.
In 2019, BCI imposed a three-year moratorium on new law colleges. It lifted the ban in 2021 due to legal challenges and reimposed it in August 2025. Teachers believe moratoriums alone will not improve education standards.
Curriculum Challenges and Autonomy
Institutions must follow BCI’s curriculum. The three-year LLB program mandates 20 compulsory and 10 optional papers. Raj stated this leaves limited autonomy, restricting colleges to minor adjustments in optional papers.
Conflicts arise with other regulators. In 2024, BCI objected to dual and joint degree programs, demanding its approval. This clashed with UGC guidelines promoting internationalization, aligned with the National Education Policy 2020.
The parliamentary panel also noted the legal curriculum must address diverse legal professions beyond courtroom practice. Advocate Yadav highlighted a disconnect between the tough All India Bar Examination (AIBE) standards and the education provided in law colleges.
BCI’s stance on LLM degrees has led to litigation. After introducing one-year LLM programs in 2013, BCI abolished them in 2021 and refused to recognize foreign LLM degrees. In April 2025, BCI formed a committee to review the equivalence of one-year and two-year LLM formats.
An anonymous open university teacher questioned BCI’s role in LLM programs, suggesting graduates often enter academia, not litigation. They also questioned restrictions on distance learning for law courses, particularly for working professionals. Officials at the Bar Council of India did not respond to queries.