With the Attorney General’s written consent in hand, the Supreme Court Bar Association Files Criminal Contempt Petition against journalist Nikhil Wagle and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut over their remarks about the Chief Justice of India.
New Delhi: Seeking criminal contempt action under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) has moved a petition against journalist Nikhil Wagle and Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut over remarks about Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, after Attorney General R Venkataramani gave his written consent on 15 October 2026. The allegations are those of the SCBA and are untested. The Court has not yet taken up the petition, and both respondents are presumed to have committed no contempt unless the Court holds otherwise [Supreme Court Bar Association v. Nikhil Wagle and Sanjay Raut].
SCBA President and Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai sought the consent. The petition has not been listed or heard, and no bench has been constituted.
The consent of the Attorney General
Granting consent under Section 15(1)(b) of the Act, Attorney General R Venkataramani said the comments appeared prima facie scandalous and intended to lower the esteem of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice in particular. He called Mr Wagle’s statement abusive and low-level. As for Mr Raut, he said the claims about judges and dinners were not based on facts, and he pointed to a Delhi High Court order of 19 June, which had found that the photographs circulated as being from a London badminton event were from a November 2025 event at a stadium in New Delhi and had directed that the content be taken down.
In his view, the MP should have verified the facts first.
The remarks complained of
According to the consent letter and the petition, the remarks followed Chief Justice Surya Kant’s decision the previous week to decline an Opposition delegation’s request to meet him personally about the Delhi protests, telling them they could file a petition before the Court instead. The SCBA says that Mr Wagle, reacting to a news report on that decision, posted an abusive remark about the Chief Justice on X, and that Mr Raut, in remarks carried by the news agency IANS on 12 October, said that judges attend political programmes of the ruling party in states it governs and accept dinners hosted by Chief Ministers, and referred to photographs said to show judges playing badminton with political figures in London.
The SCBA contends that a deliberate post by a senior journalist to a mass audience scandalises the Court and lowers its authority, and that Mr Raut’s statements were false. The abusive words complained of are not repeated here.
What the SCBA seeks
The petition says the SCBA does not seek to stop fair and temperate criticism of the judiciary, and argues that the remarks go beyond it. It asks the Court to direct X Corp, Meta, Google and IANS to preserve the posts, videos and account records, and to restrain Mr Wagle and Mr Raut from making similar imputations against the Chief Justice and judges while the case is pending.
An apology, and no word yet from Mr Raut
On 15 October, Mr Wagle shared on X a letter to the Attorney General in which he tendered an unconditional apology to the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court, described his post as an emotional outburst, said he had deleted it and asked that the matter not be pursued. No response from Mr Raut was available at the time of writing, and this report will reflect it when it is. Whether the apology will affect the proceedings is for the Court to decide.
Why the consent matters
Under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, a private body such as a bar association can move the Supreme Court for criminal contempt only with the written consent of the Attorney General or the Solicitor General, which is why the consent is what cleared the way for this petition. It is a prima facie view and not a finding of contempt. After hearing both sides, the Court will decide whether any contempt is made out and where the line between criticism and contempt falls.
Case Title: Supreme Court Bar Association v. Nikhil Wagle and Sanjay Raut (criminal contempt petition under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; case number not available)
Forum: Supreme Court of India; not yet listed
Date of Attorney General’s consent and filing: October 15, 2026