Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said he was misquoted in media reports regarding his remarks on the CJP and NEET protests [1].
The clarification comes as the judiciary faces scrutiny over its handling of public demonstrations and police actions. The tension between the court and the press highlights the sensitivity of judicial commentary during active social unrest.
Speaking in New Delhi on Friday, the Chief Justice addressed reports that suggested he lacked the time to watch videos of the protests [1]. He said that these accounts did not accurately reflect his position and described the coverage as "reckless reporting" [2].
Chief Justice Surya Kant emphasized that the judicial process must be followed and that the court does not arbitrarily dismiss grievances. He said that the Supreme Court never refuses to hear cases [1].
Regarding the specific allegations of police excesses during the protests, the Chief Justice noted that no writ petition had been filed on the matter [1]. He said that the court cannot act on reports alone without the proper legal filings being submitted through official channels [2].
The Chief Justice reiterated that the court remains open to all litigants who seek justice through the established legal framework. He said that the institution is committed to hearing the concerns of the public, provided the procedural requirements are met [1].
“"I was misquoted."”
This incident underscores the friction between rapid-cycle digital news and the formal, procedural nature of the Indian judiciary. By clarifying that no writ petition had been filed, the Chief Justice is reminding the public and the press that the court's jurisdiction is triggered by formal legal filings, not by media narratives or social media trends.
