Supreme Court advocate Vineet Jindal has written to Attorney General R Venkataramani, seeking consent to initiate contempt proceedings against Samajwadi Party MP Ram Gopal Yadav and Congress leader Udit Raj for derogatory remarks about CJI DY Chandrachud. Jindal argues that their comments undermine the dignity of the judiciary and could encourage reckless allegations against judges, threatening the integrity of the judicial system.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: On Tuesday, Supreme Court advocate Vineet Jindal submitted a formal request to Attorney General R. Venkataramani, seeking his consent to initiate contempt of court proceedings against senior Samajwadi Party (SP) leader and Member of Parliament (MP) Ram Gopal Yadav, as well as Congress leader Udit Raj.
The contempt case pertains to derogatory and objectionable remarks the two politicians allegedly made about Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud.
The contentious comments reportedly came after the CJI mentioned that he prayed to God for a resolution in the sensitive Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Title case, further adding that his faith had helped in reaching a solution. Both political leaders are accused of making derogatory comments in response to this statement.
Why Is Attorney General’s Consent Required?
Under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, combined with Rule 3 of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court (1975), the consent of the Attorney General (or Solicitor General, in case of the AG’s recusal) is mandatory for criminal contempt proceedings to be initiated by a third-party petitioner. This rule is intended to deter frivolous petitions.
However, the court can initiate contempt proceedings on its own (suo motu) without seeking the AG’s consent.
In his letter to the Attorney General, Vineet Jindal argued that the politicians’ statements
“tarnish the dignity of a high constitutional post like the CJI, degrade his image in the eyes of the public, and scandalize the authority of the Supreme Court.”
Furthermore, Jindal warned that such remarks could interfere with judicial proceedings and undermine the administration of justice.
He emphasized,
“If persons making such remarks are allowed to go scot-free, political leaders will feel emboldened to make reckless allegations against judges whose decisions do not align with their political interests. This could soon lead to the demise of an independent judiciary.”
The Core of Jindal’s Argument
Jindal’s letter to AG Venkataramani expressed deep concern over the potential impact of the politicians’ remarks. He stated,
“By stating the above statements, the said persons, intent to disgrace and scandalize the judiciary system and having abused the head of the judiciary system, they have questioned the sanity and fairness of the procedures of the Indian judiciary system.”
The advocate went on to emphasize the gravity of such comments coming from political leaders, warning that these individuals hold significant influence over public opinion. He added,
“Such statements by the political leaders who have the power to influence the minds of masses is an attempt to provoke and intimidate the common man against the judiciary system of our country.”
According to Jindal, these remarks are not just baseless but are also a deliberate attempt to lower the public’s esteem for the judiciary, particularly the Chief Justice, who is entrusted with safeguarding citizens’ rights and delivering justice.
In continuation of his concerns, Jindal wrote,
“If this kind of precedent were allowed, political leaders would start making reckless allegations against the judges of the highest Court of our country and this trend would soon lead to the failure of an independent judiciary system.”
He stressed that such statements from influential leaders can instill a sense of mistrust among the masses, potentially eroding public faith in the judiciary.
Jindal also underscored the importance of protecting the CJI’s reputation, stating,
“Through these statements, the said persons have dishonoured the honorable CJI of the Supreme court who is the guardian of the whole legal system and disgraced and jeopardized the integrity of the entire judicial system.”
According to Jindal, these inflammatory remarks threaten the integrity of the legal system and fuel public doubts about its standards.
Conclusion of the Letter
Concluding his letter, Jindal requested the Attorney General’s consent for the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against Ram Gopal Yadav and Udit Raj. He stated,
“I am therefore seeking your kind consent under section 15 (1) (b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Rule 3 of the Rules to Regulate the Proceedings for the Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975, to initiate criminal contempt against Member of Parliament Ram Gopal Yadav and former MP Udit Raj.”
This request for contempt action highlights the ongoing tension between political commentary and judicial independence in India, raising questions about the boundaries of free speech, especially when it comes to public officials commenting on judicial matters.
The Attorney General’s response will be crucial in determining the next steps in this high-profile case.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
