Rahul Gandhi's march to the Supreme Court, what is the meaning of this politics?

Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge had sought time to meet Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant. But the Chief Justice refused the meeting.

Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge sent a letter to the Chief Justice saying that they want to meet him and put forward their concerns on many issues including the Election Commission and alleged 'vote theft'.

The Chief Justice said that the matters related to the issues on which the meeting has been requested are already pending in the Supreme Court. Holding separate meetings on such matters would not be in keeping with judicial decorum.

So the question is whether the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha seeking an appointment with the Chief Justice was a part of a normal constitutional process or should it be seen as a political step?

What does the law say?

Senior legal analyst Faizan Mustafa said in a conversation with BBC Hindi, "After asking for a meeting, opposition leader Rahul Gandhi said in his video that we will meet not in the capacity of any political party but as citizens. Despite this, the decision on the basis of which the Chief Justice has refused to meet is absolutely correct."

Faizan Mustafa insists that the SIR case is currently before the Chief Justice's bench.

He says, "The cases related to violence in Delhi, use of police force or contempt of court are to be heard today (October 12). In such a situation, it is not right for the Chief Justice to meet any political delegation in these cases related to SIR."

Faizan Mustafa explains this matter with an example.

Skip to Most Read Skip to content

most read

finished

He says, "Even if 140 crore people march towards the Supreme Court and the rights of one person are being violated, then the Supreme Court should not see on which side the numerical strength is."

Was asking for meeting time a political move?

Senior journalist and political analyst Vijay Trivedi considers this to be a purely political move.

He says, "Rahul Gandhi is taking his movement forward politically. His asking for an appointment with the Chief Justice is definitely a political step. By doing this, he wants to keep this movement in the news every day."

Vijay Trivedi says, "On the other hand, the Chief Justice does not meet anyone like this. It is the job of the judiciary to hear the issue that comes before it, within the constitutional framework. The only way to present one's views before the Chief Justice is through a petition."

He says, "We should understand this difference clearly. The Chief Justice is not a public representative."

Have past incidents involving the judiciary and the executive diminished trust?

skip ahead podcast

Dinbhar: Same voice, new style

Big news from the country and the world that made headlines.

episode

finished

Talking about this, senior legal analyst Faizan Mustafa says that certainly some incidents have happened in the past which should not have happened.

According to him, "It started in the year 2018, when the then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi took Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Court No. 1 of the Supreme Court. People did not look at it well. Later, when Ranjan Gogoi was nominated to the Rajya Sabha, it was considered more controversial."

Meanwhile, he also mentions another incident.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi attended Ganpati Puja at the Delhi residence of the then Chief Justice Justice DY Chandrachud on Wednesday evening, September 11, 2024.

In today's context, Faizan Mustafa says, "It is not completely correct to say that the Supreme Court is with the government, but many decisions point in this direction."

He says, "It was not right for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to visit the house of the then Chief Justice and make its video public. That video should not have been made public, because it creates doubt in the minds of people."

Did this step prove wrong for Congress?

Senior journalist Vijay Trivedi looks at this question in a mixed manner. He says there are three sides to it.

He says, "The first side is that of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India, who are performing their duty only within the ambit of the law. The Supreme Court can take suo motu action, but that too will be within the ambit of the court and the law."

"The other side is of Congress. Rahul Gandhi and other opposition parties want to keep this movement alive through such efforts. Part of any movement is to keep it discussed. Opposition parties are trying to do this in some way or the other. Sometimes Congress, sometimes CJP and sometimes Aam Aadmi Party are doing something or the other every day."

"The third party is the Bharatiya Janata Party. BJP has its own questions. It says that the opposition is not respecting the constitutional institutions. Due to this, the BJP has got the opportunity to make a strategy against Rahul Gandhi that the opposition is trying to put pressure on the constitutional institutions of the country."

What did BJP say on this issue?

BJP national spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia criticized Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in the press conference held on October 12.

He said that the judiciary should be kept away from day-to-day political battles. He accused Rahul Gandhi of mixing constitutional principles and political activities.

BJP leader Nishikant Dubey wrote on

What did other opposition leaders say?

Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut criticized the Chief Justice's decision to deny him a meeting.

Raut said the opposition wanted to raise its concerns with the Chief Justice on issues related to alleged vote theft and special intensive revision of voter lists.

He said that the people of the country will remember this decision of the Chief Justice.

When did Rahul Gandhi and Kharge ask for an appointment with the Chief Justice?

Earlier, after meeting President Draupadi Murmu on October 9, Rahul Gandhi had said that the opposition will go to the Supreme Court on Monday and submit a memorandum to the Chief Justice.

Earlier, leaders of opposition parties had marched from Parliament to Vijay Chowk with their demands against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and submitted a memorandum to the President.

The next day, i.e. on October 10, Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge wrote a letter to the Chief Justice asking for a meeting on October 12 between 4 to 5 pm.

According to the Chief Justice's reply letter, both the opposition leaders wanted to submit a memorandum on issues related to the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commission, alleged arbitrary arrests of several students, closure of metro stations and cancellation of trains, among other matters.

What did Congress say?

While talking to journalists in Bengaluru on October 11, Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge informed about the request to meet the Chief Justice.

He said that he and Rahul Gandhi will present the country's situation before the Chief Justice.

Kharge said that he cannot make any demand from the Chief Justice, he can only make a request.

He accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah of creating chaos in the country.

Kharge also alleged that there is a situation like undeclared emergency in the country and the government is scared of the youth movement.

What reply did the Chief Justice give in the letter?

Chief Justice Justice Surya Kant gave a written reply to the letter of Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge.

In this he said that the issues on which time has been sought for talks are already under consideration in the Supreme Court.

According to him, holding such a meeting on pending matters would not be in accordance with the principle of separation of powers enshrined in the basic structure of the Constitution and established judicial decorum.

The Chief Justice also made it clear that the Supreme Court does not have the authority to resolve the issues raised in the letter at the administrative level.