The attack against the Supreme Court just got a lot more edgier, angrier. First, it was Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar. Now, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey.
Mr Dubey, an MP from Godda in Jharkhand, launched a broadside against the Supreme Court, and he is not playing coy. Words like “anarchy” “inciting religious wars” have been thrown at the highest court of the land in the country by the BJP MP. Opposition Congress said attempts are being made to “weaken the Supreme Court”.
The comments follow Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar’s “Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to judiciary 24×7” comments. The Vice President made the comments after a Supreme Court judgment effectively laid down a deadline for the President and Governors to clear Bills.
“How can you give direction to the appointing authority? The President appoints the Chief Justice of India. The Parliament makes the law of this country. You will dictate that Parliament?… How did you make a new law? In which law is it written that the President has to take a decision within three months? This means that you want to take this country towards anarchy. When the Parliament sits, there will be a detailed discussion on this…,” said Mr Dubey, appearing to raise questions of propriety and limits on judiciary’s power.
#WATCH | BJP MP Nishikant Dubey says, “How can you give direction to the appointing authority? The President appoints the Chief Justice of India. The Parliament makes the law of this country. You will dictate that Parliament?… How did you make a new law? In which law is it… https://t.co/CjTk4wBzHA pic.twitter.com/HYNa8sxBVt
— ANI (@ANI) April 19, 2025
Mr Dubey’s party, the BJP, has so far not reacted to the explosive comments of their MP.
“Supreme Court is responsible for inciting religious wars in the country. The Supreme Court is going beyond its limits. If one has to go to the Supreme Court for everything, then Parliament and State Assembly should be shut,” said Mr Dubey, without giving proof of how the top court has incited religious wars.
The comments come amid the ongoing hearing in the Supreme Court over several petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.
The Centre had assured the Supreme Court during the hearing held on April 17 that it would not denotify any ‘Waqf-by-user’ provision and would not include any non-Muslim members in the Board. The assurance came a day after the top court said it will consider staying those parts of the law.
The petitioners have claimed the law violates multiple rights granted by the Constitution, including right to equality and freedom of religion.
Condemning the remarks, the Congress said “Supreme Court is being targeted”.
“Efforts are being made to weaken the Supreme Court. Different voices are deliberately coming up and the Supreme Court is being targeted. There is the issue of electoral bonds, the issue of Waqf has come up, the issue of Election Commission is about to come,” said Congress’ Jairam Ramesh, General Secretary in charge of Communication.
Congress leader Manickam Tagore termed Nishikant Dubey’s statement on the Supreme Court “defamatory,” and said that his attack on the top court is “not acceptable.”
“This is a defamatory statement against the Supreme Court. Nishikant Dubey is a person who continuously demolishes all other institutions. Now, he has attacked the Supreme Court. I hope that the Supreme Court judges will take this into notice as he is not speaking in Parliament but outside it. His attack on the Supreme Court is not acceptable,” Tagore told news agency ANI.
Congress MP Imran Masood said that the reported statement made by the BJP leader is “unfortunate.”
“The kinds of statements that are coming against the Supreme Court are very unfortunate…This is not the first time that the Supreme Court has given a decision against the full majority government…This frustration is incomprehensible,” Mr Masood said.
BJP MP’s provocative remarks also follow days after the Supreme Court, the final arbiter in matters of constitutional rights, order in a Tamil Nadu case, in which it ruled that Governor RN Ravi’s decision to withhold assent to 10 bills was “illegal and “arbitrary”. The Supreme Court bench set a three-month deadline for Presidential and gubernatorial assent to Bills passed by the legislature for the second time. The top court further underlined that it would be prudent for the President to refer Bills with constitutional questions to the Supreme Court.
Mr Dubey’s comments mirror the example of Jagdeep Dhankhar, who had raised questions against the judiciary, saying “so we have judges who will legislate, who will act as super-parliament”.
“There is a directive to the President by a recent judgment. Where are we heading? What is happening in the country? We have to be extremely sensitive. It is not a question of someone filing a review or not. We never bargained for democracy for this day. President being called upon to decide in a time-bound manner, and if not, becomes law. So we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super-parliament, and absolutely have no accountability because law of the land does not apply to them,” Mr Dhankhar had said.
