The Supreme Court has asked Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut to explain his remarks targeting the judiciary after he criticised Chief Justice of India Surya Kant for declining to meet Rahul Gandhi and other Opposition leaders.
A Bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued the direction while hearing a petition filed by Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and raising concerns over the functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI). Raut is also among the petitioners in the case.
The Court has allowed Raut to participate in the proceedings for now, but made his continued participation subject to an explanation of his conduct.
“In W.P. (C) No. 1351/2026 (Item 25), the petition on behalf of Petitioner No. 6 is entertained on a provisional basis, subject to his explaining his conduct,” the Bench stated.
Raut’s remarks on the judiciary
Raut had questioned the CJI’s decision not to meet Gandhi and other Opposition leaders, who had sought an audience to discuss concerns surrounding the Election Commission.
In his criticism, the Shiv Sena (UBT) MP alleged that judges were willing to interact socially with political leaders but refused to meet Opposition representatives when they sought to raise issues concerning democracy.
He also claimed that around 80 Supreme Court and High Court judges had been seen playing badminton with political leaders in London.
“You can meet them, play with them, have dinner or lunch with them, with Chief Ministers. You can suddenly resign to join a political party. You don’t care for principles and law then but when we want to meet you to save democracy…you say we will not meet political leaders,” Raut had said.
In a separate media interaction, Raut alleged that judges attended political events organised by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), while BJP Chief Ministers hosted dinners in their honour.
Contempt proceedings also in focus
The matter comes amid a separate move to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Raut and journalist Nikhil Wagle over their comments concerning the CJI and the judiciary.
Attorney General R Venkataramani has granted consent for the initiation of such proceedings following a request from the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA).
In its plea seeking consent, the SCBA also disputed the context in which certain photographs had been presented. It clarified that images described as showing judges participating in a badminton event in London were, in fact, from an event held at New Delhi’s Thyagaraj Stadium in November 2025.
The Supreme Court’s latest direction leaves Raut’s participation in the electoral rolls case provisional until he addresses the concerns raised over his conduct.