The Supreme Court on Thursday made it clear that political demonstrations and public pressure would not influence its judicial functioning, with Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant asserting that “nobody can browbeat the judiciary.” The observations came during a hearing on petitions filed by Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders challenging decisions of the Election Commission of India (ECI) concerning the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The court also directed that CCTV footage of the INDIA bloc’s protest on its premises be preserved.
The issue of the INDIA bloc’s march to the Supreme Court was raised during Thursday’s proceedings by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia. Objecting to the demonstration inside the court complex, Bhatia argued that the judiciary should not become a venue for political processions and said that the incident should not have occurred.
Responding to the concerns, CJI Surya Kant firmly reiterated the independence of the judiciary. When the possibility of political pressure on the court was raised, he described such efforts as “feeble attempts” that would not influence its functioning. He also indicated that the judiciary remained aware of public statements and developments outside the courtroom, rejecting any suggestion that it was isolated from the political environment.
The court’s direction to preserve CCTV recordings from its premises adds an important procedural dimension to the controversy. The recordings could help establish the circumstances surrounding Monday’s gathering. However, the preservation order itself should not be interpreted as a finding of wrongdoing by any individual or political party.
How Rahul Gandhi’s March Reached the Supreme Court
On Monday, Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi led an INDIA bloc march from Barakhamba Road in central Delhi towards the Supreme Court. The demonstration drew a large gathering within the court complex and triggered objections over the use of judicial premises for a political protest.
The march followed an earlier request by Gandhi for an appointment with the CJI to discuss concerns regarding the SIR exercise and the functioning of the Election Commission. CJI Surya Kant declined the meeting, pointing out that the issues Gandhi wished to raise were already pending before the court.
The CJI also made a distinction between the government’s administrative responsibilities and the Supreme Court’s judicial role. While the court could not be expected to intervene in routine administrative functioning, affected parties could approach it through appropriate legal proceedings and seek relief under the law.
That distinction is central to the present dispute. Opposition leaders have raised concerns about the electoral-roll revision process, while the Supreme Court must examine the legal questions before it on the basis of the pleadings, applicable constitutional provisions and relevant evidence.
INDIA Bloc’s Petition Seeks Scrutiny of SIR Decisions
The petition has been filed by Rahul Gandhi, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge and several other INDIA bloc leaders, including Trinamool Congress MP Saugata Roy, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, RJD leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, NCP (SP) leader Supriya Sule, Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut, CPI leader D Raja, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha leader Mahua Majhi, CPM leader MA Baby and IUML leader ET Mohammed Basheer, among others.
Leave Your Comment