The clarification came a day after Chief Justice Kant’s remarks during a court hearing sparked widespread debate and public criticism. During proceedings on Friday, the Chief Justice had expressed concern over the presence of individuals allegedly possessing fraudulent law degrees. He stated that society already contained enough “parasites” targeting the judiciary and other institutions, and emphasised that members of the legal profession must not associate with such elements.
The controversy intensified after his reference to “unemployed youngsters” in the context of individuals who, according to him, lacked employment or professional standing and subsequently became media participants, social media commentators, and Right to Information activists, allegedly using institutional criticism as a tool for attack. He also used the term “cockroaches” during his oral observations, triggering strong reactions across public discourse.
Responding to the backlash, Chief Justice Surya Kant said, “I am pained to read how a section of the media has misquoted my oral observations made during the hearing of a frivolous case yesterday. What I had specifically criticised were those who have entered professions like the Bar with the aid of fake and bogus degrees. Similar persons have sneaked into the media, social media, and other noble professions, and hence they are like parasites. It is totally baseless to suggest that I criticised the youth of our nation.”
He further added that he holds India’s youth in high regard, stating that he is proud of the country’s present and future human resource base and considers young people to be the pillars of a developed India.
The remarks were originally made during a hearing before a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The bench was hearing a petition filed by advocate Sanjay Dubey, who sought initiation of contempt proceedings against the Delhi High Court over alleged delays in implementing Supreme Court guidelines concerning the designation of senior advocates.
During the hearing, the bench strongly criticised what it described as repeated and unnecessary attacks on the judiciary. The Chief Justice observed that some individuals without stable employment later become media participants, social media commentators, and Right to Information activists, and then begin targeting institutions.
He further stated, “There are youngsters like cockroaches, who do not get employment or have any place in the profession. Some of them become media, some of them become social media, Right to Information activists and other activists and they start attacking everyone.”
The bench declined to entertain the petition, observing that the designation of senior advocates is a distinction granted by the court and not a right enforceable through litigation. It also expressed strong disapproval of the petitioner’s conduct and the language allegedly used on social media platforms, warning that such behaviour did not align with the expected standards of the legal profession.
Chief Justice Kant also referred to concerns regarding a growing number of lawyers allegedly holding questionable or fake degrees, stating that the issue required investigation and urging intervention from the Central Bureau of Investigation.
During the proceedings, the court remarked, “Thousands of fraudulent people wearing black robes with serious doubts about their degrees. The Central Bureau of Investigation needs to take action.”
As the hearing progressed, the petitioner tendered an apology before the court and requested permission to withdraw the plea. The bench subsequently allowed the withdrawal.
The episode has reignited debate over judicial language, courtroom restraint, and the growing concern over alleged fraudulent entry into the legal profession, while also highlighting tensions between institutional criticism and perceived attacks on the judiciary in public discourse.
About The Author
Comment List