The Bar Council of India has withdrawn the upper-age limit for LLB admissions, telling the Supreme Court that age alone will no longer keep an otherwise eligible student out of a law degree.
New Delhi: A resolution passed only the previous day was handed to the Supreme Court on Friday, November 6, 2026, and it ended a ten-year-old challenge to the maximum age limit for admission to law courses. The Bar Council of India (BCI) informed the Court that the restriction for both the three-year and five-year LLB programmes has been withdrawn [Rishabh Duggal v. Bar Council of India through its Chairman].
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana disposed of the writ petition as infructuous in view of the BCI’s resolution.
In court
Advocate-on-Record Radhika Gautam, appearing for the BCI, informed the bench of the development and handed over the resolution in court. She explained that it had been passed only the previous day, which was why it had not been filed earlier.
Advocate Zoheb Hossain, for the petitioner, asked the Court to record the closing lines of the resolution, which describe the General Council’s decision as conscious and final. He reminded the bench that the BCI had once before withdrawn the provision and then restored it. The bench closed the matter in view of the resolution.
What the resolution says
As per the resolution, the restriction was withdrawn following a reasoned order by former Delhi High Court Chief Justice Rajendra Menon, Co-Chairman of the BCI’s Legal Education Committee, and a resolution of the Standing Committee on Legal Education. The General Council also noted the Supreme Court’s order of August 2026 asking BCI counsel to take instructions on withdrawing the circular. It recorded:
“The Council is satisfied that existing requirements governing educational qualifications, attendance, teaching hours, examinations and professional training adequately safeguard standards of legal education, without excluding otherwise eligible candidates merely on account of age.”
After independent consideration, the Council said, it agreed that an absolute maximum age restriction lacked sufficient academic justification.
The 2016 petition
The petition, filed by Rishabh Duggal in 2016, questioned a BCI circular of that year which restored Clause 28 in Schedule III of Rule 11 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008. The clause, earlier withdrawn in 2013, fixed a maximum age of 20 years for admission to the integrated five-year law course, with a corresponding cap for the three-year course.
The petitioner argued that the age cap violated the rights of aspiring law students under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. He relied on Indian Council of Legal Aid and Advice v. Bar Council of India, in which the Supreme Court struck down a 1993 BCI rule barring persons above 45 from enrolling as advocates. A restriction at the stage of admission itself, the plea said, was even harsher.
The petition also pointed to conflicting High Court rulings. The Punjab and Haryana and Bombay High Courts had declared the clause ultra vires the Advocates Act, 1961, while the Madras High Court had upheld the age limit.
Why the order matters
The age cap has had a long and uneven history. Introduced in 2008, withdrawn in 2013 and revived in 2016, it left students, colleges and High Courts working with conflicting positions for years. The BCI’s latest decision, placed on record before the Supreme Court, removes that uncertainty for the time being and opens law schools to older students, career changers and those who could not study law immediately after school.
Because the petition was closed as infructuous, the Court did not decide whether a regulator of the profession can lawfully cap the age of entry into legal education. That question, which the 1993 enrolment ruling had touched upon, remains open should the restriction ever return.
Case Title: Rishabh Duggal v. Bar Council of India through its Chairman [W.P.(C) No. 1023 of 2016]
Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, Supreme Court of India
Date of Order: November 6, 2026
Appearances: Advocate Zoheb Hossain for the petitioner; AoR Radhika Gautam for the Bar Council of India