Delhi HC rules attendance shortage can’t bar students from law exams; directs BCI to review norms citing Sushant Rohilla case
The Delhi High Court has ruled that no law college or university can bar students from appearing in exams due to attendance shortages, citing the 2016 suicide of law student Sushant Rohilla. The court directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to re-evaluate mandatory attendance norms, incorporate credits for practical activities, and implement mental health reforms to safeguard students' well-being.
The Delhi High Court delivered a landmark judgment prohibiting law colleges and universities from preventing students from taking examinations due to inadequate attendance. This ruling was prompted by the tragic suicide in 2016 of Sushant Rohilla, a third-year law student at Amity Law School, who was barred from exams for failing to meet attendance requirements. The court emphasized that education norms, especially attendance rules in legal education, must not be so stringent as to cause mental trauma or lead students to extreme actions. It directed the Bar Council of India to re-evaluate and revise attendance regulations for three-year and five-year LLB courses. This review should align with the National Education Policy 2020, which encourages flexible learning and practical training rather than rigid attendance. The court urged incorporating co-curricular activities such as moot courts, seminars, debates, and court visits into attendance credits. Additionally, the HC called for mental health reforms and stakeholder consultations involving students, parents, and teachers to create a more supportive academic environment. The judgment also stayed the BCI's biometric attendance and CCTV mandates, reinforcing the principle that attendance should not be a barrier to academic progression or exams. The court acknowledged Sushant Rohilla's case as a driving force for these reforms, underscoring the need to balance academic discipline with student welfare.
