In a fresh development that puts the spotlight on political commentary targeting the judiciary, a lawyer has approached the Supreme Court seeking contempt proceedings against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Nishikant Dubey.
The request follows Dubey’s recent remarks, where he questioned the judiciary’s role in lawmaking and made sharp personal comments against Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna.
Dubey’s Comments Spark Controversy
The controversy stems from Dubey’s statement, made just two days earlier, where he said that if the Supreme Court intends to make laws, then “Parliament and state assemblies should be shut.” He also blamed the Chief Justice for alleged “civil wars” in the country, remarks that have since drawn widespread criticism.
Court’s Response
When the matter came up before the Supreme Court on Monday, Justice B.R. Gavai addressed the petitioner’s intent to file a contempt case, stating, “You file it. For filing, you don’t require our permission.” The response effectively cleared the path for legal action, should the required permissions be secured.
On April 20, advocate Anas Tanveer, representing a litigant in the ongoing Waqf Act case, formally reached out to Attorney General R. Venkataramani, seeking approval to initiate criminal contempt proceedings under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with the Supreme Court’s contempt rules.
In his letter, Tanveer described Dubey’s statements as “deeply derogatory and dangerously provocative.” He added:
“I am writing this letter… to humbly seek your kind consent for initiating criminal contempt proceedings against Shri Nishikant Dubey… for statements made by him in public that are grossly scandalous, misleading, and aimed at lowering the dignity and authority of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.”
Waqf Act Hearing
Dubey’s remarks came after the Centre informed the Supreme Court that it would refrain from enforcing some disputed provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act until the next hearing. The assurance followed strong questioning from the court regarding certain aspects of the amendment.
Remarks
In response to the growing backlash, the BJP leadership moved quickly to clarify its position. Party president J.P. Nadda publicly stated that the remarks reflected Dubey’s personal views, not those of the party.
Nadda reiterated the BJP’s respect for the judiciary, calling it “an inseparable part of democracy.” He also confirmed that he had advised party leaders to avoid making such statements in public.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
