"Re-examine all that you have been told... dismiss that which insults your soul": Supreme Court dismisses plea against appointing Justice DY Chandrachud as CJI, said "No reason to entertain this petition. It is completely misconceived. Thus dismissed"

The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea against appointing Justice DY Chandrachud as the next Chief Justice of India (CJI) [Mursalin Asijit Shaikh v. Union of India].
|
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India UU Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat a,nd Justice Bela M Trivedi considered a petition filed by Mursalin Asijith Shaikh.
"We see no reason to entertain this petition. The entire plea is completely misconceived. Thus dismissed," the Court ordered.
The petition, which was otherwise not listed in the cause list for today, was mentioned for urgent listing by the petitioner's counsel today morning. The counsel requested a posting tomorrow saying that the oath-taking ceremony is on November 9, 2022. CJI UU Lalit then said that the petition will be heard today itself at 12.45 PM.
The petition was filed on the basis of a representation filed by one Mr.Rashid Khan Pathan before the President of India against Justice Chandrachud. The complaint was made viral in social media and WhatsApp groups, which led by the Bar Council of India and several other bar associations to issue public statements strongly condemning the allegations and discarding them as baseless.
|
When the matter was taken, the petitioner's lawyer took objection to CJI Lalit hearing the case, as he had recommended Justice Chandrachud as the successor.
"We're only on the point whether you've made out the case or not", CJI Lalit said.
The counsel that in a case related to COVID vaccination, when a senior advocate appeared, Justice Chandrachud's bench allowed tagging, but when a junior advocate appeared in a similar matter, no tagging was allowed.
The counsel further contended that Justice Chandrachud's bench heard a special leave petition arising out of an order in the Bombay High Court in which his son had appeared as a counsel. "This is an admitted matter, the BCI said that learned judge was not aware that his son was appearing. It cannot be, as the order was annexed", he submitted.
The second issue had already been highlighted by one RK Pathan by way of a complaint to the CJI and the President of India, the plea pointed out.
The plea besides seeking action of contempt of court and other criminal action against Justice Chandrachud, also prayed for a direction to the Central government to refrain from appointing him as the CJI.
At this juncture, CJI Lalit asked the counsel to show proof that the said order was annexed to the SLP. "Show us that the order was part of the paper book?", CJI asked.
The counsel, after struggling for some time to find the annexure, requested that the matter be posted tomorrow. "You said that you were prepared and that is why we decided to hear", CJI did not appreciate the counsel's conduct.
"Whatever you wish to argue, you argue now", CJI told the counsel when he repeated the request to adjourn the hearing.
|
The apex court, however, made it clear that judicial orders passed by a judge cannot be grounds to challenge his appointment.
"You cannot argue or make such points here," Justice Bhat said.
"If you have anything in substance, we are willing to hear you", the CJI repeated.
As the counsel could not advance any further submission, the bench proceeded to dismiss the petition.
The bench, therefore, dismissed the plea.
References:
Support Us
Satyagraha was born from the heart of our land, with an undying aim to unveil the true essence of Bharat. It seeks to illuminate the hidden tales of our valiant freedom fighters and the rich chronicles that haven't yet sung their complete melody in the mainstream.
While platforms like NDTV and 'The Wire' effortlessly garner funds under the banner of safeguarding democracy, we at Satyagraha walk a different path. Our strength and resonance come from you. In this journey to weave a stronger Bharat, every little contribution amplifies our voice. Let's come together, contribute as you can, and champion the true spirit of our nation.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
ICICI Bank of Satyaagrah | Razorpay Bank of Satyaagrah | PayPal Bank of Satyaagrah - For International Payments |
If all above doesn't work, then try the LINK below:
Please share the article on other platforms
DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text. The website also frequently uses non-commercial images for representational purposes only in line with the article. We are not responsible for the authenticity of such images. If some images have a copyright issue, we request the person/entity to contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and we will take the necessary actions to resolve the issue.
Related Articles
- Gender Biased Indian Law: Delhi High Court observed that in India, expenditure borne by brother in supporting his divorced sister must be taken into account while passing an order of maintenance in favour of his wife
- "In the pursuit of justice, let's not forget the essence of the law": Section 498A IPC, enacted to protect married women from cruelty, is now being misused. This misuse disrupts familial harmony and undermines genuine cases, warns Jharkhand High Court
- "अंधा कानून": Kanhaiya Lal's brutal beheading by radical Islamists for supporting Nupur Sharma shocked Udaipur, and now, in a sorry state of justice, Mohammed Javed, who informed the killers, is granted bail, sparking outrage and fear across the nation
- "Truth is often stranger than fiction": Imagine finding a Shivling in every mosque's fountain!" Maulana Tauqeer Raza muses, stoking controversy over the Gyanvapi structure. Is it truth or clever wordplay? History meets sarcasm in this religious saga
- Plea of MP Navneet Rana and husband MLA Ravi Rana to quash FIR for the gruesome and heinous crime of reciting Hanuman Chalisa outside Matoshree dismissed by Bombay HC: Justices stated that it was devoid of merit
- “Keep your pity because you’re going to need all your pity for what’s coming”: Central Government declared PFI a terror outfit of radical Islam, its associates or fronts as an unlawful association and ban them with immediate effect, for a period of 5 year
- "You cannot deny guilt, and thereby you allow the Curse to be your due": Lower court grants Divorce to husband after 19-years for 20-day marriage, Wife challenges order in High Court, not exceptional case as our courts are flooded with endless litigations
- 5 lakh kg of temple jewellery has been melted so far, DMK government planning to melt even more
- Why Hindus not claiming their temples back from the Government control: Is pro-Hindu govt will always be in power
- Supreme Court is all set to hear a Muslim side's petition against the survey of Gyanvapi complex after the survey team finds Shivling inside the disputed structure: 3 member bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud
- "अल्हम्दुलिल्लाह!!! Mob has no religion": The Rajasthan High Court grants bail to 18 Islamists accused in the Hindu Shobha Yatra attack in Chittorgarh, highlighting the challenges of pinpointing culprits amidst the chaos of mob-induced communal violence
- "If it were not for injustice, man would not know justice": Supreme Court stayed arrest of the resigned principal of Indore's Government New Law College, Dr Inamur Rahman, in an FIR registered over "Hinduphobic" book in the college library
- "Success & all good things in life, start with a genuine concern for others": Supreme Court collegium publishing RAW, IB opinions on candidates for judgeship a matter of concern, crores of pending cases, delay of justice is denial of justice: Kiren Rijiju
- “Man cannot be freed by the same injustice that enslaved it”: Supreme Court stays Uttarakhand High Court order on Haldwani eviction, and disapproved the manner in which eviction was sought to be carried out by the Indian Railways, urges rehabilitation
- Supreme Court steps in to decide whether Rohingyas are ‘refugees’ or ‘illegal immigrants’, raising critical concerns about whether the judiciary is once again overstepping its constitutional limits and assuming the role meant for the government