Supreme Court slams petitioner whose father phoned CJI Surya Kant's brother and questioned court's order

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took strong exception to the conduct of a litigant whose father allegedly rung up the brother of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and questioned an order passed by the Court.

This was revealed by CJI Kant in open court.

"He calls up my brother and asks him how the Chief Justice of India has passed this order," the CJI said.

The case concerned one Nikhil Kumar Punia, a man from an upper caste Hindu background seeking minority reservation after converting to Buddhism.

When the matter was initially heard on January 28, the Bench comprising CJI Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi had taken serious objection to the plea, terming it a "new type of fraud".

This was after the man revealed to the Court that he was born into Jaat Puniya community before converting to Buddhism.

The Court had then proceeded to direct the Haryana government to apprise it of the guidelines for issuance of a minority certificate and whether upper caste general category candidates can get a minority certificate by claiming to have converted to Buddhism.

When the matter was taken up for hearing on Wednesday, CJI Kant revealed that the petitioner's father called up his brother and questioned the order passed by the Court.

"Now you tell us why we should not initiate criminal contempt against the father of your client. You are not serious in the matter. Are you aware what he has done? Should I disclose it in open court?" the CJI told the petitioner's counsel.

"I am not aware, Your Lordship. We have not received any report," the counsel for the petitioner said.

"He calls up my brother and asks him how the Chief Justice of India has passed this order. Will he dictate us? This is his conduct," CJI Kant said.

"I am not aware of this, Your Lordship," the lawyer replied.

"You verify it. As counsel, you should first consider withdrawing. This is sheer misconduct. Even if he is outside India, I know how to deal with such people," the CJI said.

"I am very sorry, sir, but I am not aware of all this," the counsel said.

"Nobody dares to do this. And you think I will transfer the case because of this? I have dealt with such elements for the last 23 years," the CJI made it clear.

"I am very sorry, sir," the counsel repeated.

"I think you are trying to manipulate matters there as well. This is what you are doing," the CJI said.

The Court eventually adjourned the matter after noting that the State of Haryana is yet to file its compliance report pursuant to the earlier order by the Bench.

"Let Mr. Singhal, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Haryana, take instructions and submit a compliance report of our earlier order. If not, the Chief Secretary of the State of Haryana shall remain personally present in Court on the next date," the Court said in its order.

The case will be heard again next week.

[Read Live Coverage]