Chief justice of India Surya Kant on Wednesday came down heavily on a petitioner after reportedly learning that his brother had allegedly been contacted over a court order passed in the case.
Hearing the matter, the CJI questioned why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against the petitioner’s father, who is said to have made the call.
According to a report in Live Law, addressing the petitioner’s counsel, the CJI expressed sharp disapproval, saying, “Why should there not be contempt proceeding against your client? He dares to call my brother on phone and tells how CJI has passed this order? He will dictate me?” the CJI added.
Also Read | ‘As if victim’s a table’: Supreme Court raps Gurugram Police over lapses in 4-yr old’s rape case
He went on to caution that such actions would not be tolerated: “You verify, and then as a counsel, first you should withdraw! Even if he hides out of India, I know how to deal with these kind of people. Never ever dare to do it. I have dealt with these kind of elements for last 23 years,” the report said.
Counsel apologises, says unaware of call
The petitioner’s counsel told the court that he was unaware of the alleged conduct of the petitioner’s father and apologised for the incident.
The controversy arose during the hearing of a case filed by two candidates from Haryana seeking admission to a postgraduate medical course under the Buddhist minority quota at a medical college in Uttar Pradesh, as reported by Live Law.
Also Read | LPG supply to be snapped for those refusing PNG switch where available: Govt
The institution has reportedly been declared a Buddhist minority educational institution, and the candidates claimed eligibility on the grounds that they had converted to Buddhism.
In January, a bench led by the CJI had expressed doubts over the genuineness of the claimed conversions and ordered an inquiry into the minority certificates submitted by the petitioners, the report added.
The matter came up again on Wednesday, when the court was informed about the alleged phone call, prompting the strong reaction from the CJI.
