Sanjay Raut must appear in person, Nikhil Wagle virtually in Supreme Court contempt case

FILE PHOTO: Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut has been directed to appear in person before the Supreme Court on November 17 in contempt proceedings over remarks concerning the judiciary. | Photo Credit: Ravi Choudhary

The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut to appear before it in person on November 17 in contempt proceedings over remarks concerning Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and the judiciary.

Observing that the issue pertains to the “entire institution of judiciary”, a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi also directed journalist Nikhil Wagle to appear virtually before it on the next date of hearing.

On October 16, the apex court had issued show-cause notices to Raut and Wagle in the matter. The top court, however, had exempted them from personal appearance on October 28, saying it would first consider their explanations.

The show-cause notices were issued on a contempt plea filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA).

After the hearing on Wednesday, Raut said he will remain present in the top court as directed in the matter.

He said he was not fully aware of what transpired in the court as his lawyers were not present.

During the hearing on Wednesday, senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Wagle, said he has tendered an unconditional apology for his posts which were later deleted.

“Now that he (Wagle) has deleted and expressed remorse and tendered unconditional apology, let him appear,” the bench observed, adding that Wagle can appear before the court virtually.

“This is an issue which pertains to the entire institution of judiciary,” the bench observed.

Senior advocate Pradeep Rai and other advocates, who appeared for the SCBA, referred to the X posts of Raut and Wagle and said these posts showed they don’t have respect for the highest court of the country.

The bench noted that counsels appearing for the SCBA have submitted that Raut has filed a reply affidavit.