The Supreme Court on Friday issued a contempt notice to Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut and journalist Nikhil Wagle for allegedly scandalous and derogatory social media posts against Chief Justice of India Surya Kant. The court scheduled the matter for further hearing after two weeks.
βIssue notice as to why contempt of court proceedings should not be issued against them,β stated a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The bench exempted Raut and Wagle from personal presence during the proceedings, noting its hope that better sense prevails.
The bench characterized the remarks made by Raut and Wagle as very unfortunate, observing that they seemingly do not realize they are being monitored. The court noted that each of them has previously approached the institution for remedies, and the judiciary has never been lax in hearing their pleas.
The formal notice followed a day after the Supreme Court Bar Association moved for contempt proceedings against Raut and Wagle. SCBA president and senior advocate Pradeep Kumar Rai had requested the court to mandate their personal appearance, though the bench declined that request.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta backed the association's application, remarking that many individuals act deliberately and attempt to exert pressure on the courts. The SCBA petition was filed under Article 129 of the Constitution, the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, and relevant institutional rules, which require prior consent from the Attorney General or Solicitor General.
The SCBA had approached Attorney General R Venkataramani, who granted his consent after concluding that the posts by Wagle and Raut were prima facie scandalous and intended to diminish the esteem of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice.
According to the petition, the remarks followed the Chief Justice's refusal to meet Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge on Sunday, an action justified by the principles of separation of powers and matters sub judice concerning the Election Commission and electoral roll reviews.
The plea highlighted that Raut shared a video alleging that judges attend ruling party political functions and chief ministerial dinners. It also pointed to claims regarding photographs of judges playing badminton with political figures, which allegedly maligned the Chief Justice and other jurists.
The bar association dismissed Raut's assertions as false, referencing a Delhi High Court order from June clarifying that the badminton photographs originated from an event at Thyagaraj Stadium the previous year rather than London. The petition argued that these knowingly false statements were designed to undermine the court's authority and integrity, which remain vital for maintaining public confidence in the rule of law and the administration of justice.