Newdelhi,Oct 16, 2026 13:14 ISTThe Supreme Court on Friday issued show-cause notices to Shiv Sena UBT Rajya Sabha member Sanjay Raut and journalist Nikhil Wagle in connection with criminal contempt proceedings. The action stems from their public remarks regarding Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and the judicial institution. A bench that included the Chief Justice and Justice Joymalya Bagchi chose to exempt both respondents from personal appearance at the upcoming hearing, noting that the court would evaluate their written explanations first.
The formal notices followed a contempt petition submitted by the Supreme Court Bar Association. Pradeep Rai, the president of the SCBA and a senior advocate, argued that the commentary made by Raut and Wagle crossed the line past fair criticism and risked damaging public trust in the highest court. During the proceedings, the Chief Justice expressed concern over targeted attacks against the judiciary, emphasizing that the courts routinely defend personal liberty and fundamental rights, making such criticism regrettable. While the SCBA initially pushed for the personal attendance of the two respondents, the bench opted for the standard show-cause route.
Prior to the court filing, Attorney General R Venkataramani granted formal approval to launch criminal contempt proceedings under Section 15 1 b of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971. The SCBA lodged its petition on October 15, and the Attorney General provided his consent on the same day. The dispute arose after the Chief Justice turned down a request for a private meeting from a visiting delegation of opposition leaders, advising instead that their concerns be formally filed through a regular court petition.
According to the allegations outlined in the SCBA petition, Wagle subsequently published an objectionable post directed at the Chief Justice on the social media platform X, though he later reportedly deleted it. Raut similarly faced allegations of making improper statements. The Supreme Court will review the submitted responses from both Raut and Wagle before deciding how to proceed further with the contempt matter.