There was a time when even senior journalists and national newspapers avoided critical commentary on Supreme Court judgments, especially those of the Chief Justice of India, fearing that “contempt of court” proceedings would be initiated against them. Their occasional criticism was often laced with prevarication.
Against this backdrop, the public discourse over the last few days — actually, weeks — is remarkable in the country’s judicial history. It involves the incumbent CJI, whose comments and silence have been interpreted in many different ways. Rarely has a CJI been in the spotlight so much for reasons other than his judicial orders.
A New Era of Scrutiny for the Supreme Court
The latest sequence began on the campus of the National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR), Hyderabad, when a large section of students announced their opposition to CJI Surya Kant serving as the chief guest at the proposed convocation. The development was unprecedented, as law students had taken on the country’s highest judicial officer.
The CJI did not react to it but was forced to intervene when the Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman, Mohan Kumar Mishra, issued a now-withdrawn directive asking state bar councils not to enrol any student of the university’s 2026 batch. He had also sought an inquiry to identify the students involved in the campaign against inviting the CJI to the convocation.
NALSAR alumni threw their weight behind the agitated students, saying they were well within their rights to ask the varsity not to invite the CJI. The alumni wrote an open letter to the BCI chairman condemning the language in his now-withdrawn directive, which vilified students and faculty by alleging groupism, dirty politics and nasty politics.
The BJP Rajya Sabha member not only withdrew the directive following the backlash but also apologised for his comments, saying he sincerely regretted and apologised if his words had hurt the feelings of law students. “An expression of regret is not a matter of ego or prestige. It’s simply an acknowledgement that the feelings and concerns of our students matter,” he was quoted as saying in a letter.
Mishra’s apology came only after the CJI described the directive as “absolutely uncalled for”. He said the matter was between him and the students, asking, “Who are they (BCI) to unnecessarily create an issue?” The CJI averred that students had the right to protest peacefully, and no one could stop them.
In a welcome gesture, he said the students should get licences to practise at the earliest and begin their careers in the apex court. He said he was also involved in many student activities. Indulging in activities or protests does not mean the students are wrong.
Students have a fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. So long as they are lawfully and peacefully raising their voices over an issue, it must be heard, not opposed, the CJI said, adding, “We will empanel them and give them legal aid cases. This will be our response to those who intend to create impediments in their careers.”
When Students Challenge the Chief Justice
The students’ opposition to the CJI stemmed from his comment during proceedings concerning alleged police excesses against protesters at Jantar Mantar. The SC bench headed by the CJI had reportedly declined to watch the video footage of alleged police brutality, citing lack of time.
Ironically, the Jantar Mantar protests that led to the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over the NEET paper leak issue were organised by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), itself a product of a comment made by the CJI weeks earlier.
CJI Surya Kant later said his oral remarks had been misquoted and misused with malicious intent to mislead the youth. While hearing a case on May 15, the CJI had compared some individuals with fraudulent degrees to “cockroaches” who become RTI activists to attack the system.
The comments sparked a backlash among youngsters, leading to an online satirical movement led by Abhijeet Dipke. The CJP also backed the movement by NALSAR students.
The recent events mean that even the apex court and institutions like the BCI are under scrutiny from the media, students, alumni and activists. This has coincided with greater transparency in court proceedings, not just for litigants but also for the public. Earlier, only a handful had access to court premises. Live telecasts of proceedings have helped bridge that gap.
