New Delhi [India], April 22: The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear next week a plea filed by Advocate Narendra Mishra seeking criminal contempt proceedings against BJP MP Nishikant Dubey over his recent controversial comments targeting the judiciary and Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna.
Mentioning the matter before a bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih, Mishra expressed concern that despite letters to Attorney General R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta seeking consent for contempt proceedings, no action had been initiated.
Dubey had stirred controversy after allegedly blaming CJI Sanjiv Khanna for “civil wars in the country,” remarks which quickly gained traction on social media and, according to Mishra, led to a wave of derogatory posts against the Supreme Court.
“These statements are false, reckless, and malicious,” Mishra said in his letter petition, emphasizing that they amount to criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. He called for the removal of the offensive online content and for suo moto criminal contempt action against the MP, stating that such actions “intimidate the judiciary, incite public disorder, and delegitimise the institution entrusted with protecting the Constitution.”
Mishra argued that Dubey’s comments—accusing the Supreme Court of “inciting religious wars” for hearing challenges to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025—constituted a dangerous misrepresentation of the judicial process and a serious interference in the administration of justice. “This isn’t political commentary. It’s a direct attack on constitutional authority,” he asserted.
The controversy follows a series of recent criticisms by Dubey, including remarks that the judiciary is pushing the country toward “anarchy” and that legislative bodies may as well be “shut down” if the Supreme Court is “dictating laws.”
In addition to Mishra’s plea, several other advocates, including Anas Tanwir and Shiv Kumar Tripathi, have written to the Attorney General, seeking contempt proceedings against Dubey for his “grossly scandalous” comments intended to “lower the dignity” of the apex court.
Separately, Advocate Subhash Theekkadan has also sought criminal contempt proceedings against Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar for remarks questioning the Supreme Court’s timeline directive on presidential assent for state Bills. Dhankhar had recently accused the judiciary of behaving like a “super Parliament” and warned against firing a “nuclear missile” at democratic institutions.
As per legal procedure, private individuals can only initiate contempt proceedings with the prior consent of the Attorney General or Solicitor General—a hurdle Mishra hopes the court will acknowledge and act upon directly, given the seriousness of the allegations and the public position held by the accused.
The plea is now expected to be listed for hearing in the coming week. The developments come amid rising tensions between branches of the Indian government, sparking a broader conversation about constitutional balance and the limits of political speech.