Supreme Court Issues Contempt Notice to Sanjay Raut and Journalist Nikhil Wagle

New Delhi, October 16 (Daily Kiran) : The Supreme Court of India has issued contempt notices to Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha member Sanjay Raut and senior journalist Nikhil Wagle. This action stems from a criminal contempt petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) regarding their alleged statements against the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

A bench comprising Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Joymalya Bagchi has asked Raut and Wagle to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them. However, the court has currently exempted them from appearing in person. This development comes amid ongoing controversy surrounding remarks made by Raut about the CJI.

Raut had claimed during a media interaction on October 12 that he had seen the CJI and 60 to 70 judges playing badminton with BJP leaders in London. Meanwhile, Wagle posted an objectionable comment about the CJI on his X handle on October 11.

Senior lawyer Pradeep Rai, representing the SCBA, expressed the organization’s concern over the need for contempt proceedings, emphasizing that ignoring such remarks could encourage similar statements from others.

During the hearing, Chief Justice Chandrachud noted that many people fail to realize they are being manipulated into making provocative comments. He reaffirmed that the courts have always defended individuals’ rights and expressed regret over the ongoing criticism, hoping that people would come to understand the truth.

In a letter to Attorney General R. Venkataramani, Wagle stated that he has removed the post and unconditionally apologized to the CJI and the Supreme Court. He described his comment as an emotional reaction to feelings of distress and frustration, expressing regret for his language and clarifying that he was not trying to justify his remarks.

In a separate matter, the Supreme Court sought clarification from Raut regarding his conduct. This occurred as the court temporarily accepted a petition filed by Raut, challenging the Election Commission’s special intensive review (SIR) process concerning the electoral roll.

The bench directed that Raut’s petition be accepted on a provisional basis, contingent upon his clarification about his conduct.

Opposition leaders approached the Supreme Court on October 12, alleging large-scale deletions and irregularities in the electoral roll amendment process. The court has issued notices in response to their petition, which must be answered by October 27, and has ordered that this case be consolidated with other pending petitions.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, present in the courtroom, remarked that some individuals deliberately make such comments, believing they can exert pressure on the judiciary, but such attempts often prove futile.