'Will Dictate Terms to Me?': CJI Shreds Counsel For Questioning Order, Calling His Brother

New Delhi: Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant came down heavily on what he described as an attempt to influence judicial proceedings, warning of possible criminal contempt action after a person reportedly contacted his brother to question a court order.

“Someone called my brother and asked how I passed such an order. Why should there not be contempt proceedings against him?” the CJI questioned.

The CJI, during a hearing related to a medical admission dispute, spoke about this incident in open court. 

Expressing strong displeasure, he addressed the counsel appearing for the Haryana government, saying, "He dares to call my brother and question how the CJI has passed the order? Will he dictate terms to me? You must verify this -- and as counsel, you should first withdraw."

Indicating that he will be strict with such interference with judicial functioning, he said, "Even if he hides outside India, I know how to deal with such people. Never ever attempt this again. I have dealt with such elements for the last 23 years." 

The observations came while the Supreme Court was hearing a petition concerning admission under a Buddhist minority quota at Subharti Medical College in Meerut, an institution recognised by the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions.

The case involved siblings Nikhil Kumar Punia and Ekta Punia, who sought minority benefits after converting to Buddhism, despite earlier appearing as General Category candidates. Their admissions were put on hold following a notification issued by the Uttar Pradesh government.

Taking a stern view, the bench flagged what it described as a possible misuse of provisions meant for minorities. "This is a new kind of fraud. Don't make us say more," the CJI had remarked.

It questioned the timing of the conversion and the process through which minority certificates were issued, particularly in the case of candidates from communities traditionally classified under the General category.

The court also raised concerns over administrative lapses, seeking clarity from Haryana authorities on the guidelines governing issuance of minority certificates. It further examined whether individuals who had previously declared themselves as General Category candidates could later claim minority status for admission benefits.

The plea was ultimately dismissed, with the court underlining the need to safeguard the integrity of reservation policies and prevent their misuse.

ALSO READ: The Right To Ride: Supreme Court Calls For Dedicated 'Disabled-Friendly' Upgrades In Transport Apps