The Supreme Court has sharply criticized BJP MP Nishikant Dubey for his remarks against the judiciary and the Chief Justice of India (CJI), describing them as "highly irresponsible" and indicative of a lack of understanding regarding the role of Constitutional Courts. Despite the severity of his comments, the Court decided against taking any direct action, emphasizing that such remarks cannot undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar heard a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari. The PIL sought suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Dubey and requested the registration of FIRs against political leaders making hate speeches, specifically in the context of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025.
Read also: Supreme Court Urges Centre to Clear Collegium Recommendations to Address High Court Vacancies
Nishikant Dubey's controversial statements were made following the Supreme Court's intervention in petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025. He went to the extent of blaming CJI Sanjiv Khanna for being "responsible for all the civil wars happening in India" and accused the Supreme Court of "inciting religious wars in the country."
The Supreme Court bench noted that Dubey's statements had the potential to scandalize and diminish the authority of the Court while obstructing the administration of justice.
"In our opinion, the comments were highly irresponsible and reflect a penchant to attract attention by casting aspersions on the Supreme Court of India and the Judges of the Supreme Court. This apart, the statements show ignorance about the role of the constitutional courts and the duties and obligations bestowed on them under the Constitution," the Court stated.
Read also: Supreme Court Directs Grant of Disability Pension to Army Veteran Diagnosed with Schizophrenia
The Court also clarified that Dubey’s comments did not qualify for exemptions under the Contempt of Courts Act and firmly rejected his claims, stating that there is no "civil war in India."
"At the same time, we are of the firm opinion that courts are not as fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements. We do not believe that the confidence in and credibility of the courts in the eyes of the public can be shaken by such absurd statements," the Court asserted.
While the Court chose not to initiate contempt proceedings, it emphasized that not every contemptuous statement warrants punishment. The Court highlighted that judges are guided by principles like free press, fair trial, judicial independence, and public confidence.
Read also: Supreme Court Issues Split Verdict on Guilt of Ex-TN Minister’s Wife in Disproportionate Assets Case
"Surely, courts and judges have shoulders broad enough and an implicit trust that the people would perceive and recognize when criticism or critique is biased, scandalous and ill-intentioned," the bench added.
On the issue of hate speech, the Court firmly stated that any attempt to spread communal hatred or engage in hate speech must be "dealt with an iron hand." The Court warned that such speech erodes societal harmony and is a criminal offense.
"Hate speech cannot be tolerated as it leads to loss of dignity and self-worth of the targeted group members, contributes to disharmony amongst groups, and erodes tolerance and open-mindedness," the Court emphasized.
This decision by the Supreme Court reaffirms its commitment to protecting the dignity of the judiciary while promoting free expression and tolerance in society.
Case Title : Vishal Tiwari vs Union of India
