Supreme Court Today (April 21) asked a lawyer to seek the Attorney General’s permission before filing contempt charges against BJP MP Nishikant Dubey. The case involves Dubey’s controversial statement blaming CJI Sanjiv Khanna for “all civil wars in the country.”
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India today told a lawyer that he must first take permission from the Attorney General (AG) before he can file a contempt of court case against BJP MP Nishikant Dubey.
The case is about Dubey’s strong comments against the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna.
A two-judge Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih gave this direction during the court hearing. The lawyer who appeared wanted to move a contempt petition, but the judges said that the correct process must be followed.
ALSO READ: MPs’ Remarks On SC| “BJP Completely Rejects These Statements”: Union Minister JP Nadda
Justice Gavai clearly said:
“Make a case before AG. He will give permission.”
As per the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, if a private person wants to file a contempt of court case in the Supreme Court, they must first get written approval from either the Attorney General (AG) or the Solicitor General (SG).
ALSO READ: BJP MP Nishikant Dubey: “CJI Khanna Responsible for All Civil Wars in the Country”
The issue started when Nishikant Dubey, a Member of Parliament from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), made a controversial comment during an interview with Asian News International (ANI).
He blamed the Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna by saying:
“All civil wars in the country were because of him.”
After this comment, some lawyers wrote to the Attorney General, requesting permission to file a contempt case against Dubey under the same Contempt of Courts Act.
This controversy comes at a time when several BJP leaders are making strong remarks against the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court. They accuse the top court of doing the work of the executive and even making laws through its judgments, which is usually the job of the Parliament.
Nishikant Dubey made these remarks shortly after the Supreme Court gave directions related to the Waqf Amendment Act. The court had taken up petitions challenging the Act, and the central government later said it would not apply certain parts of the law for now.
Earlier also, there was criticism from top political leaders. The Vice President of India and Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar said that Indian judges have no proper accountability, and they act as if normal laws don’t apply to them.
He had strongly criticized the judiciary after a recent Supreme Court decision that interpreted the powers of the Governor and the President of India in relation to laws passed by state legislatures.
This whole matter has now sparked a fresh debate between the judiciary and the political leadership, raising questions on separation of powers, freedom of speech, and the respect for the court’s dignity in a democratic setup like India.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Waqf
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
