E-Paper
‘Highly irresponsible’: Supreme Court rebukes BJP MP Nishikant Dubey for remarks on CJI Khanna
The Supreme Court said it is of the firm opinion that “courts are not as fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements”.
The Supreme Court on Thursday came down heavily on Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey, calling his recent remarks against the apex court and its judges “highly irresponsible” and reflect a penchant to attract attention by casting aspersions on the court and judges.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar was hearing a plea filed by advocate Vishal Tiwari seeking suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Nishikant Dubey and to register FIRs against hate speeches made by political leaders in the context of the Waqf Amendment Act 2025.
“MP’s remarks show ignorance about the role of the constitutional courts and the duties and obligations bestowed on them under the Constitution,” said the Supreme Court in a strongly worded order.
Also Read | 'Close down Parliament if…': Nishikant Dubey attacks Supreme Court; Congress MP says ‘not acceptable’
The Supreme Court said it is of the firm opinion that “courts are not as fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements”.
The court, however, junked the plea.
On April 22, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) passed a resolution condemning remarks made by Dubey against the Supreme Court and the CJI.
Dubey had allegedly said the "Supreme Court is taking the country towards anarchy" and that “Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna is responsible for the civil wars taking place in the country”.
"In our opinion, the comments were highly irresponsible and reflect a penchant to attract attention by casting aspersions on the Supreme Court of India and the Judges of the Supreme Court. This apart, the statements show ignorance about the role of the constitutional courts and the duties and obligations bestowed on them under the Constitution," the court said.
“At the same time, we are of the firm opinion that courts are not as fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements. We do not believe that the confidence in and credibility of the courts in the eyes of the public can be shaken by such absurd statements, though it can be said without the shadow of doubt that there is a desire and deliberate attempt to do so,” it said.
The court added that every contemptuous statement need not result in punishment because "judges are judicious, their valour non-violent and their wisdom springs into action when played upon by a volley of values, the least of which is personal protection".
