Supreme Court Asks Nikhil Wagle To Appear Virtually & Sanjay Raut Physically In Contempt Case Over Comments Against CJI
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed journalist Nikhil Wagle to appear virtually and Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut to appear physically on the next date of hearing in a criminal contempt petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) over their remarks against Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and the judiciary.
They have to appear at 2 PM on November 17.
A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M Pancholi was hearing the matter. The petition was filed after obtaining written consent from the Attorney General for India, who opined that the comments of the respondents were scandalous.
In today's hearing, Senior Advocates Pradeep Rai and Rahul Kaushik, along with Advocates Pragya Baghal and Meenesh Dubey, appeared for the SCBA. They referred to the tweets made by the alleged contemnors and submitted that their posts show that they don't have any respect for the highest Court of the country.
Per contra, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising(for journalist Nikhil) submitted that he has tendered an unconditional and sincere apology for his tweets. She added that the journalist has an unblemished career spanning over five decades and he had deleted his post upon receiving the contempt notice. Further, he doesn't intend to justify his actions. SCBA members, however, contended that the post was deleted after a delay of 5 days.
The bench noted the apology and deletion of the post. Justice Kumar observed that since remorse had been expressed, Wagle should be present. Jaising clarified that his non-appearance earlier was on her legal advice, though he was willing to appear, and sought permission for virtual appearance as he resides in Mumbai. The court permitted Wagle to appear virtually for the time being, with the possibility of requiring physical presence later if needed.
No counsel appeared for Raut (Respondent No. 2) during the hearing, though Advocate-on-Record Vishnu Sharma had filed a vakalatnama. The court directed Raut to appear physically on the next date.
SCBA members pointed out that MP Raut had made another post where he wrote about how the Indian Supreme Court could face the same situation as had happened to the Albanian Supreme Court (which was burned down by protesters).
Justice Kumar observed that the issue pertains to the entire institution of the judiciary. In response to Jaising's remarks about the institution needing to reciprocate the love of the legal fraternity and allowing space for frustration, the judge noted that the judiciary has stood for others and that together they have stood for others.
It ordered: "We have heard Jaising for R1, who has brought to our notice the affidavit filed by the first respondent and has prayed for discharge of the show-cause notice. Having regard to the magnitude of the issue involved, we are of the considered view that the first respondent shall appear virtually on the next date of hearing.
The learned advocates for the petitioners would submit that 2nd respondent has filed reply affidavit and has drawn attention to the posts posted on social media. However, the copy of the affidavit is not on record. Registry to put on record. It is reported that Shri Vishnu Sharma has filed valakatnama for R2 but office report says none has entered appearance. Be that as it may, we direct R2 to be present in the court physically on the next date. Relist on 17.11.26 at 2 pm."
About the petition
As per their petition, after the CJI declined to meet the delegation of Opposition parties in connection with ongoing protests in Delhi, Wagle posted from the account @waglenikhli stating: " **** you CJI".
SCBA, in its petition filed under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, has submitted that such a deliberate and intentional post made on social media by a senior journalist to a mass audience scandalises and tends to lower the authority of the Court.
SCBA says Raut also made false statements, alleging that judges attend political programmes of the ruling party and accept dinners hosted by Chief Ministers. Reportedly, he referred to the alleged photographs of judges playing badminton with political figures in London and imputed allegations against the CJI and other judges. He made these comments criticising the CJI's refusal to meet the Opposition Leaders on the SIR issue.
While granting consent, AG R Venkataramani observed that their comments are prima facie "scandalous and intended to lower the esteem of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, particularly the Chief Justice of India". The Attorney also pointed out that the comments concerning judges' playing badminton in London have been found to be false by the Delhi High Court.
The AG thus allowed the request made by SCBA President Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai.
Later, Wagle expressed an unconditional apology for his comment, saying that it was an emotional outburst, and that he has deleted the post.