The Supreme Court on Friday, October 16, issued notices to journalist Nikhil Wagle and Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut, asking them to explain why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them over their remarks against Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant.
A bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), seeking criminal contempt action against the two. The court also exempted Wagle and Raut from appearing in person, Live Law reports.
SCBA Says Remarks Cannot Be Ignored
Senior advocate and SCBA President Pradeep Rai told the court that the association was pained to initiate contempt proceedings. However, he argued that ignoring such objectionable comments could encourage others to make similar statements against the judiciary.
“People don’t understand they are being trapped,” CJI Surya Kant observed during the hearing.
Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta also supported the petition, saying such statements were deliberately made to intimidate the judiciary and put pressure on the court.
“Many understand; they do it deliberately. They misunderstand that it will bring pressure on court. It is an attempt to pressure the court, a futile exercise though,” Mehta said.
CJI Calls Continued Criticism Unfortunate
Expressing concern over repeated criticism of the judiciary, CJI Surya Kant defended the courts’ role in protecting citizens’ rights.
“Courts have never lagged behind in protecting rights. If you still keep condemning, it’s very unfortunate. Hope better sense prevails on everyone. It is unfortunate,” the CJI said.
The observations highlight the court’s concern over statements that it believes could undermine public confidence in the judiciary. The proceedings also bring attention to the sensitive balance between freedom of expression and respect for judicial institutions.
What Triggered The Contempt Petition?
The controversy began after the CJI declined to meet a delegation of Opposition parties amid ongoing protests in Delhi over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) issue.
According to the SCBA petition, Wagle subsequently posted an abusive remark directed at the CJI from his social media account, @waglenikhil, using the words “**** you CJI”.
The association argued that the post, made by a senior journalist to a large social media audience, was deliberate and intended to scandalise the court and lower its authority.
The petition was filed under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act after the association obtained written consent from Attorney General for India R Venkataramani.
Raut’s Remarks On Judges Also Questioned
The SCBA also raised objections to statements allegedly made by Raut while criticising the CJI’s decision not to meet Opposition leaders over the SIR issue.
According to the petition, Raut alleged that judges attended political programmes organised by the ruling party and accepted dinners hosted by Chief Ministers.
He also reportedly referred to alleged photographs of judges playing badminton with political figures in London, making allegations against the CJI and other judges.
The association described these statements as false and objectionable, arguing that they could damage the judiciary’s reputation.
Attorney General Found Remarks Prima Facie Scandalous
While granting consent for the contempt petition, Attorney General R Venkataramani observed that the remarks made by Wagle and Raut were prima facie “scandalous and intended to lower the esteem of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, particularly the Chief Justice of India”.
He also pointed out that the Delhi High Court had found the claims concerning judges playing badminton with political figures in London to be false.
Following these observations, the Attorney General granted the request made by SCBA President Pradeep Rai to initiate contempt proceedings.
Also Watch:
Wagle Apologises, Raut Expresses Regret
In a significant development ahead of Friday’s hearing, Wagle issued an unconditional apology on Thursday, October 15, describing his social media comment as an emotional outburst.
He also confirmed that he had deleted the controversial post.
Raut, too, reportedly expressed regret over his remarks in an interview with news agency ANI. He said that if his statements had created an impression that he had defamed the Supreme Court, he regretted them and apologised.
Despite the apologies, the Supreme Court has issued notices to both, seeking their responses on why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated.
The matter now places the two public figures under judicial scrutiny, with the court set to consider their explanations before deciding on further action.
