'Someone dared to call my brother': CJI slams attempt to question his order, warns of contempt action
In a sharp rebuke, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has warned of possible criminal contempt proceedings after an alleged attempt was made to question his judicial order through personal channels.
During a hearing in the Supreme Court of India, the CJI revealed that an individual had contacted his brother to question how a particular order was passed.
Taking serious note, he said such actions strike at the independence of the judiciary.
“Someone called my brother and asked how I passed such an order. Why should there not be contempt proceedings?” the CJI observed, expressing strong displeasure.
Addressing counsel for the Haryana government, he directed verification of the incident and said the concerned lawyer should consider withdrawing from the case. “Will he dictate terms to me?” the CJI asked, warning against any such interference.
He also issued a stern caution, saying that such conduct would not be tolerated under any circumstances and could invite strict legal consequences.
Minority quota case in focus
The remarks came during proceedings in a case involving admissions under the Buddhist minority quota at a medical college in Meerut.
Petitioners had sought benefits as members of a minority community after converting to Buddhism, despite previously applying under the general category.
Their admissions were halted following a state notification.
The court took a critical view of the matter, earlier describing it as a “new kind of fraud” and raising concerns about misuse of minority provisions.
Court questions certification process
The bench also questioned how minority certificates were issued in such cases and sought clarity from the Haryana government on the guidelines governing such certifications.
Raising broader concerns, the court underlined the importance of protecting genuine minority rights and preventing misuse of reservation benefits, indicating that the issue has wider implications beyond the present case.
With strong observations from the bench, the matter has brought both judicial propriety and the integrity of reservation policies under sharp focus.
Support Our Journalism
We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism
IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.
Support objective journalism for a small contribution.
