The Delhi High Court on Monday rejected a plea seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into an assault on advocates protesting against Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra at the BCI premises on the intervening night of August 20-21, 2026 [Kunal Yadav & Ors v. Manan Kumar Mishra & Anr].
Justice Girish Kathpalia said that the petition was not maintainable.
The Court said that the petitioner lawyers ought to have first approached the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) and, thereafter, the concerned magistrate, instead of directly invoking the Court's writ jurisdiction.
It also expressed "respectful disapproval" of the petitioners' argument that since Mishra is a sitting member of parliament (MP) from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Delhi Police will not act fairly but CBI will.
"No basis has been submitted to buttress this apprehension. In the absence of any specific basis, it is not fair to tarnish the entire Delhi Police force in this manner, especially when petitioners’ own case fails to make out a cognizable offence. Besides, the apprehension argument must also fail because even CBI against whom mandamus to register case and investigate has been sought is a government body," the Court observed.
It added,
"One should resist the temptation to discredit any government organisation by such general, sweeping and baseless allegations. For, it generates counterproductive cynicism and distrust in the mind of common man against the entire ecosystem."
According to the petitioners, around 10 advocates were protesting at the BCI office on August 20-21 when around 25-30 men, some in advocates' attire, entered the premises at around 1:15 AM and assaulted the lawyers. The incident, they claim, took place in the presence of police officials.
The protest had followed the controversy over a BCI directive barring enrolment of NALSAR University's 2026 graduating batch, later withdrawn amid criticism.
The petitioners sought a direction to the CBI to register an FIR and investigate the incident, arguing that Delhi Police could not be trusted to act impartially since Mishra was a sitting MP from the ruling party.
However, the Court held that no cognizable offence was made out from the complaints on record. The Court said that the alleged conduct, none of the assailants being armed, at best constituted the offence of causing hurt, a non-cognizable offence triable only by a magistrate.
"In view of the aforesaid, the petition is dismissed as not maintainable," the Court concluded.
Advocates Prashant Bhushan, Anurag Tiwary and Anushka Singh appeared for the petitioners.
Advocate Amol Sinha appeared for the State.
Advocates Simran Kumari, Virat Raj Mishra and Pooja appeared for the BCI.
Senior Panel Counsel Shoumendu Mukherji, Government Pleader Abhishek Batra and advocates Puneet Dhawan, Megha Sharma, Anirudhha Ghosh and Kaberi Sharma appeared for the Delhi Police.
[Read Order]