Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar
Credit: PTI Photo
New Delhi: An advocate, hailing from Kerala, has sought consent from the Attorney General for initiating criminal contempt proceedings against Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, in light of his public statements, claiming those amounted to a direct attack on the authority and dignity of the Supreme Court of India.
Subhash Theekkadan, who practised in the Supreme Court, claimed the remarks made by Dhankhar in public and in an official capacity on April 17, 2025, clearly amounted to scandalising and lowering the authority of the Supreme Court of India.
The statements questioned the legitimacy and powers of the Supreme Court conferred under Article 142 of the Constitution and are thus likely to interfere with or obstruct the administration of justice, his letter stated.
"Such statements, especially coming from a high constitutional functionary like the Vice President of India, have a far-reaching and damaging effect on public confidence in the judiciary. The same undermines the dignity, authority, and credibility of the apex court. If left unchecked, such public contemptuous statements may embolden others to follow suit, thereby seriously eroding the foundational principles of the rule of law and separation of powers as enshrined in the Constitution of India," he claimed.
Dhankhar made public comments in reference to the recent judgment delivered by the Supreme Court on April 8, 2025, in State of Tamil Nadu Vs The Governor of Tamil Nadu and Another.
In his address to Rajya Sabha interns, he said, “We cannot have a situation where you direct the President of India, and on what basis? The only right you have under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution under Article 145(3). There, it has to be five judges or more. Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24x7.”
Dhankhar also said, “There is a directive to the President by a recent judgment. Where are we heading? What is happening in the country? We never bargained for democracy. The President being called upon to decide in a time-bound manner, and if not, it becomes law. So we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as a super-Parliament, and absolutely have no accountability because the law of the land does not apply to them.”
He also raised questions over not lodging an FIR against former Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma with regard to alleged recovery of cash haul at his official residence during the fire incident.
In his letter, the lawyer asked the Attorney General to grant consent under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Rule 3(c) of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975, for the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against Dhankhar before the Supreme Court of India, in the interest of upholding the dignity, authority, and sanctity of the highest judicial institution of the country.