Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Monday declined a request from INDIA bloc leaders to meet him, telling them the way to raise their grievances is a formal petition in the Supreme Court. The refusal came three days after the same opposition leaders met President Droupadi Murmu, a meeting that the government criticised as dragging her office into a political dispute.
What the CJI did
Speaking to reporters, Justice Kant said he received the opposition’s letter on Sunday and replied that night, giving reasons for being unable to meet them, which he said he was keeping confidential. In an email to Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and Rajya Sabha Leader of Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge, he is reported to have said a meeting would be inappropriate because the issues they wanted to raise are already sub judice before the Supreme Court. He is also learnt to have conveyed that the court cannot meet a delegation representing a political party at the administrative level.
He added that the court’s doors are open to everyone, whether an ordinary citizen or a member of an elected body, and that grievances will be heard in accordance with the law. He was speaking after the National Human Rights Commission’s 33rd Foundation Day function.
What had happened with the President
On Friday, INDIA bloc leaders handed President Murmu a four-point memorandum at Rashtrapati Bhavan, alleging that EVMs and electoral rolls had been manipulated and demanding, among other things, the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Government sources called it “unfortunate” that the opposition was dragging the President into the controversy over alleged electoral roll irregularities. Rahul Gandhi said the President had asked the delegation for proof of its claims.
The opposition rejects that framing. RJD MP Manoj Jha said it was the BJP that was dragging the President’s office into the matter, and that the delegation had assured her it would provide the evidence she sought.
Set side by side, the two episodes show different outcomes. The President’s meeting with the delegation became a political talking point within hours. The CJI avoided a similar situation by declining a closed-door meeting and pointing to an open court filing. That route keeps the exchange on the court record, where the arguments are made in public and the court decides on the merits, and it avoids a photo opportunity or a post-meeting political narrative.
Opposition leaders may see it differently. Rahul Gandhi’s response was that they wrote to the CJI, he told them to file a petition, and they would now march to the Supreme Court and file it. Opposition supporters could argue that a letter requesting a meeting is a normal democratic step and that the CJI’s reply is routine.
The march
Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra led the march, which Rahul Gandhi called “Chalo Delhi”. By the late afternoon, the march had reached Mandi House, over a kilometre from the Supreme Court. The bloc has said it will file its petition, which the CJI has said he will hear in accordance with the law.
The central question in the petition is whether the Supreme Court will step into a fight that the opposition has so far taken to the streets and the President’s office.
