Delhi HC: Mandatory attendance baseline in law courses could be lesser

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday favoured a reduction in the mandatory baseline attendance requirement of 70 per cent for law courses and sought the stand of the Bar Council of India.

A bench comprising Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma observed it was usual for students to intern with lawyers to increase their learning curve and on many occasions, classes were not held due to the absence of faculty.

The bench said the BCI, being the regulator, ought to take into consideration the actual ground reality in the discipline of law and then frame the rules for attendance in law courses.

“The baseline could be 40 per cent. (The remaining) they can complement with certificates (from advocates they are working with). Most classes get over by 1 or 2 pm. They can learn hands-on. Baseline should be lesser. Exam you can’t stop in any case,” it said.

The court expressed its reservations with respect to a purported BCI circular mandating the use of biometrics and CCTV for marking attendance of law students, and said the move was “completely far from reality”.

It also said any attendance requirement that debarred a student was contrary to the student’s interest and asked the BCI to place the relevant material that had resulted in the increase of baseline attendance from 66 per cent to 70 per cent.

“The regulator must keep in mind what the student wants, what they are thinking.. The regulator can’t be ignorant of what is happening on ground. There has to be a justification. Why is it 70 per cent?” the court said.

It asked the BCI to examine the proposition of reduction in baseline attendance with respect to both three-year and the five-year law course.

The court passed the order while dealing with a case in relation to the death of law student Sushant Rohilla by suicide in 2016 after allegedly being barred from sitting for the semester exams due to lack of requisite attendance.

Rohilla, a third year law student of Amity, died by hanging at his home on August 10, 2016, after his college allegedly barred him from sitting for the semester exams due to lack of requisite attendance.

The present petition was initiated by the Supreme Court in September, 2016, following the incident but was transferred to the high court in March, 2017.

The court previously said there was an imminent need for a re-look at the mandatory attendance norms in colleges and universities as the teaching methods had substantially changed post the COVID-19 pandemic.

It said the mental health of students needed to be borne in mind while considering attendance requirements and the role of grievance redressal mechanisms and support system in educational institutions should be streamlined.

The matter would be heard in February, 2025.