'Not as fragile as flowers': SC raps BJP Nishikant Dubey for 'scandalous' remarks on judiciary, CJI

“At the same time, we are of the firm opinion that courts are not as fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements," a bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar said.

Dubey launched a broadside against the apex court for hearing pleas against the Waqf Act, saying “(the) Supreme Court is taking the country towards anarchy” and that “Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna is responsible for the civil wars taking place in the country”.

The bench on May 5 heard a plea for contempt action against Dubey over his remarks and said they were the ones who heard the petitions against the amended Waqf law.

Though the bench dismissed the plea, it wrote scathing remarks against the BJP MP in its order made available Thursday.

Upon scrutiny, the bench said "no doubt" Dubey's utterances "tend to scandalise and lower the authority of the Supreme Court of India, if not interfere or tend to interfere with the judicial proceedings pending before this Court".

“In our opinion, the comments were highly irresponsible and reflect a penchant to attract attention by casting aspersions on the Supreme Court of India and the Judges of the Supreme Court,” the bench added.

The remarks, the bench pointed out, have the tendency to interfere and obstruct the administration of justice.

The statements, it said, reflect the clear intent to impute motives to the bench by naming the CJI as “responsible for all the civil wars happening in India” and “in order to incite religious wars in this country, it is only and only the Supreme Court that is responsible”.

The remarks of the lawmaker showed his ignorance about the role of the constitutional courts and the duties and obligations bestowed on them under the Constitution, the court added.

“We do not believe that the confidence in and credibility of the courts in the eyes of the public can be shaken by such absurd statements, though it can be said without the shadow of doubt that there is a desire and deliberate attempt to do so,” the order said.

Writing the order of the bench, though the CJI did not entertain the petition, he made it clear that “any attempt to spread communal hatred" or indulging in "hate speech must be dealt with an iron hand".