Notice, not a finding: the Supreme Court has asked journalist Nikhil Wagle and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut to show cause in the criminal contempt petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association over their remarks about the Chief Justice of India.
New Delhi: Taking up the criminal contempt petition of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on Friday, the Supreme Court issued a show-cause notice to Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut and journalist Nikhil Wagle, asking why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them for their public remarks about Chief Justice of India Surya Kant. The allegations are those of the SCBA and are untested, and the Court has expressed no view on the merits [Supreme Court Bar Association v. Nikhil Wagle and Another].
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi formed the Bench. SCBA President and Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai appeared for the Association.
The hearing and the notice
Opening for the Association, Mr Rai said: “We are pained to initiate this. One is a responsible journalist, one a member of Parliament.” The Bench issued notice asking the two respondents to show cause why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them, and exempted both from personal appearance. Mr Rai pressed for their physical presence, voicing concern that ignoring such remarks could instigate others, but the Court did not accept the request. The returnable date and the time allowed for a response were not available at the time of writing.
Chief Justice Surya Kant remarked: “People don’t understand they are being trapped.” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Court that many people act deliberately and that any attempt to pressure the Court would be futile. The Chief Justice then observed:
“Courts have never lagged behind in protecting rights. If you still keep condemning, it’s very unfortunate. Hope better sense prevails on everyone.”
A preliminary step under Section 15
Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act allows a body such as a bar association to move the Supreme Court for criminal contempt only with the written consent of the Attorney General or the Solicitor General. A show-cause notice only asks the respondents to explain themselves; it is not a finding that contempt has been committed. Both are entitled to be heard, and the Court will decide whether any contempt is made out and where the line between criticism and contempt falls.
What the petition says
Attorney General R Venkataramani gave his written consent on 15 October 2026, and the SCBA then moved the petition. His consent letter described the posts as prima facie scandalous and intended to lower the esteem of the Supreme Court. The remarks came after the Chief Justice’s decision not to meet a delegation of Opposition parties about the functioning of the Election Commission of India.
As the petition has it, Mr Wagle put an abusive remark about the Chief Justice on X, deleted it, and later tendered an apology. Mr Raut is said to have remarked that judges attend the ruling party’s political programmes and accept hospitality from Chief Ministers. The abusive words complained of are not repeated here, and Mr Raut has not been reported to have responded to the petition.
Where matters stand
The notice takes the petition out of the consent stage and into a live contempt proceeding before the Chief Justice’s Bench, with the question of speech about the judiciary now for the Court to decide on a full hearing. Until then, no finding has been made against either respondent. Mr Wagle’s reported apology and any reply from Mr Raut will be matters for that hearing.
Case Title: Supreme Court Bar Association v. Nikhil Wagle and Another (criminal contempt petition under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; case number not available)
Bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Date of Order: October 16, 2026
Appearance: Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai for the Supreme Court Bar Association; counsel for the respondents not reported