Debating Attendance: The Tragic Case Driving Change in Legal Education

The Delhi High Court is examining the Bar Council of India's mandatory attendance policy in law courses following the 2016 suicide of a law student due to low attendance. The court urged the BCI to convene a virtual meeting and review these norms while highlighting mental health and grievance redressal.

In a poignant reflection on the tragic suicide of law student Sushant Rohilla in 2016, the Delhi High Court has directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to reconsider mandatory attendance norms in legal education.

During a hearing conducted by Justices Pratibha M Singh and Amit Sharma, the court called for immediate action, instructing the BCI's legal education committee to hold a virtual meeting and submit their findings. The court's inquiry questions the necessity of attendance as an academic requirement, a rule that allegedly contributed to Rohilla's devastating decision.

With recent reports of multiple student suicides surfacing, the debate intensifies around the impact of attendance policies on student mental health, prompting legal scrutiny and policy evaluation amidst an evolving educational landscape post-pandemic.

(With inputs from agencies.)