English
English
English
Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut faces a Supreme Court notice over his remarks about the CJI and judges. (Img: X)
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued show-cause notices to Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut and journalist Nikhil Wagle in a criminal contempt case arising from their public remarks about Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and the judiciary.
A Bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi sought their responses on why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them. The Court, however, declined to direct their personal appearance at this stage and granted them exemption from appearing in person.
The proceedings stem from a petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), which alleged that the statements made by Raut and Wagle went beyond legitimate criticism and were capable of undermining public confidence in the Supreme Court.
During the hearing, the CJI expressed displeasure over the criticism directed at the judiciary, observing that courts had consistently intervened to protect personal liberty and other fundamental rights.
The Chief Justice remarked that individuals whose rights are threatened frequently approach courts for relief, and that the judiciary has not shied away from safeguarding those rights. Against this backdrop, he described continued attacks on the institution as unfortunate and expressed hope that better sense would prevail.
The Bench issued show-cause notices at this stage, leaving the question of whether contempt proceedings should proceed for consideration after the respondents submit their explanations.
The SCBA initiated the contempt proceedings after obtaining the requisite consent from Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The association alleged that the statements made by Wagle and Raut were intended to scandalise the judiciary and diminish the authority of the Supreme Court, particularly the office of the CJI. SCBA President and Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai represented the association.
The petition followed criticism by the two respondents of the CJI’s decision not to meet a delegation of Opposition leaders led by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. The delegation had sought a meeting in connection with concerns surrounding the functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI).
Wagle had posted an abusive remark directed at the CJI on his X account after a media report covered the decision not to meet the Opposition delegation. He subsequently deleted the post and tendered an unconditional apology to the CJI and the Supreme Court.
In his communication to the Attorney General, Wagle reportedly described the post as an emotional outburst and requested that the matter not be pursued further. The SCBA nevertheless moved the Supreme Court, contending that the nature and public reach of the remark warranted examination under the law of criminal contempt.
Raut had criticised the CJI’s refusal to meet the Opposition delegation, alleging that judges interacted with political leaders and attended political programmes while declining to meet Opposition representatives seeking to raise concerns about democracy. He also claimed that Supreme Court and High Court judges had played badminton with political figures in London. The SCBA disputed the factual basis of his remarks.
In granting consent for contempt action, the Attorney General referred to material indicating that photographs circulated as showing a London badminton gathering were actually from an event held at Thyagaraj Stadium in New Delhi in November 2025. He observed that the allegations against judges ought to have been verified before being made publicly.
The Apex Court will consider the explanations furnished by Raut and Wagle before deciding the future course of the contempt proceedings. The issuance of show-cause notices does not amount to a final finding that either respondent has committed contempt of court.
