Supreme Court Issues Contempt Notice To Kerala Congress Over X Post Against CJI Surya Kant
Supreme Court issues show-cause notice to Kerala Congress office-bearers over an allegedly disrespectful X post against CJI Surya Kant
The Supreme Court on Friday issued show-cause notice to all office-bearers of the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee over an allegedly disrespectful post against Chief Justice of India Surya Kant published on the official X handle of Congress Kerala.
The Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi was hearing a representation made by lawyers seeking initiation of suo motu contempt proceedings over the social media post.
During the hearing, counsel appearing for the Kerala Congress Committee submitted that the post had been uploaded without the approval of the office-bearers. He further stated that the post was subsequently taken down and an unconditional apology was issued.
Responding to the submission, Justice Aravind Kumar remarked: "We will see whether it has come from the pen or heart."
In its order, the Bench observed that the post was directed against the Chief Justice of India and was attributed to the social media account of a political organisation.
"The Constitution is supreme. No individual or political organisation stands above it. Independence of judiciary is not a matter of political convenience," the Court observed.
The Bench further clarified that while judgments of courts are always open to criticism, freedom of expression cannot be used as a shield for intimidation or interference with the administration of justice.
"Any attempt to undermine the authority of the Court needs to be dealt with an iron hand," the Bench said.
The Court also observed that the authority of the judiciary does not require political endorsement but rests on the rule of law.
"Where administration of justice is established, the law must take its course," it added.
The Bench stated that it would examine whether the material warranted the exercise of its powers under Article 129 of the Constitution and whether civil or criminal contempt proceedings were required to be initiated under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The Court requested the Attorney General of India to assist it in the matter and indicated the appointment of Senior Advocates Arvind Datar and Siddharth Agarwal as amici curiae.
The Bench clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.
During the proceedings, counsel for the Kerala Congress Committee submitted that the office-bearers were large in number and requested that the notice be confined to the president of the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee.
However, the Bench clarified that the notice would extend to all office-bearers, including the president and secretary, among others. The counsel appearing for the respondents accepted notice on their behalf.
The Court exempted the office-bearers from personal appearance and recorded the submission that an unconditional and unqualified apology would be tendered for the material uploaded on the official X handle.
When counsel pointed out that the post had been viewed by approximately 10 million people, Justice Aravind Kumar remarked that once damage was caused, it could have consequences beyond the immediate controversy.
"Tomorrow it may happen to every profession. We operate within the parameters of the Constitution," the Judge observed.
The Court had registered a writ petition on its own motion on a complaint by Advocate Vineet Jindal, who had sought criminal contempt proceedings over a post on the X account of Congress Kerala (@INCKerala) calling on Chief Justice of India Surya Kant to "resign now".
Jindal's complaint-cum-representation, dated October 13, 2026 and addressed to the Chief Justice, concerns two events of the previous day: the X post, and the political demonstration and slogan-shouting by opposition leaders in connection with the Supreme Court premises on the evening of October 12, which the complaint says "reportedly" involved Rahul Gandhi.
The complaint reproduces the post, which it says was published through the official account of Congress Kerala, in these words: "Dear Surya Kant, If law and order is not your domain, resign now. We will find your replacement who can handle it."
According to Jindal, the post "expressly calls upon the incumbent Chief Justice of India to resign and further states that the political organisation concerned would find a replacement capable of handling the issue of law and order." The question it raises, Jindal wrote, is whether the post, "when examined in its complete factual and legal context, … remains within the bounds of permissible political criticism or warrants consideration under the law relating to criminal contempt of court."
The complaint states, "The office of the Chief Justice of India is a constitutional judicial office and cannot be treated as one whose continuance is subject to the approval or displeasure of any political organisation."
The complaint does not treat criticism of the judiciary as contempt in itself. It accepts that free speech "includes the right to criticise judicial decisions, observations and institutional conduct within the limits prescribed by the Constitution and applicable law", and adds, "However, legitimate criticism must be distinguished from conduct that may undermine the authority of the Court or interfere with the administration of justice. The distinction must be assessed in the light of the language used, its context, the circumstances of publication and its actual or reasonably apprehended effect."
Jindal relies on Article 129 of the Constitution, which makes the Supreme Court a Court of Record with the power to punish for contempt of itself, and on the definition of criminal contempt in Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which covers any publication that "scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower, the authority of any court."
KPCC has separately apologised to CJI
The Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee has already addressed the post in a different proceeding. In a reply dated October 22 to a legal notice issued by Advocate Meenesh Dubey, KPCC President Sunny Joseph tendered "an unconditional apology to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India for the publication and the disrespect conveyed by its language."
The reply stated that the post had been published by Vijay Thottathil "without the prior knowledge, approval or consultation of the KPCC leadership", that he had been removed from his position, and that the demand for resignation and the suggestion of finding a replacement "were inappropriate and should not have appeared on an official party platform."
The events of October 12 are also the subject of a public interest litigation filed in the Supreme Court on October 13 by four advocates, which seeks a ban on political protests inside court complexes and asks the Court to consider contempt action against several opposition leaders and the KPCC.
Case Title: Vineet Jindal & Anr. v. Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee
Bench: Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi
Hearing Date: November 6, 2026