TCN News Desk
New Delhi: In a controversial critique of the judiciary, Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP)’s Lok Sabha MP Nishikant Dubey launched a scathing attack on the Supreme Court and Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, alleging that the top court is overstepping its constitutional boundaries and is responsible for fuelling religious and civil unrest in the country.
“The top court has only one aim — ‘Show me the face, will show you the law’. 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,” Dubey told ANI.
He went on to allege that the “the SC is going beyond its limits. It is responsible for inciting religious wars in the country”. “The Supreme Court want to take this country towards anarchy,” he further said.
His remarks came in the wake of the ongoing Supreme Court hearing over several petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, a law passed earlier this year that has sparked a heated debate over its implications for religious and property rights.
“There was an Article 377 in which homosexuality is a big crime. The Trump administration has said that there are only two sexes in this world, either male or female… Whether it is Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh, all believe that homosexuality is a crime. One fine morning, the Supreme Court said that we abolish this case,” Dubey said, raising questions over “judicial activism”.
He cited constitutional provisions, asserting Parliament’s primacy in law-making:
“Article 141 says that the laws we make, the judgments we give, are applicable from the lower court to the Supreme Court. Article 368 says that Parliament has the right to make all laws and the Supreme Court has the right to interpret the law.”
He also questioned judicial intervention in executive decisions, saying,
“The top court is asking the President and Governor to tell what they have to do regarding the bills. When Ram Mandir or Krishna Janmabhoomi or Gyanvapi comes, you (SC) say, ‘Show us the paper’. Mughals ke aane ke baad jo masjid bane hai unke liye keh rahe ho paper kaha se dikhao (You are saying that how can the documents be produced for the mosques that were built after the Mughals came).”
Dubey further sharpened his attack by directly blaming CJI Sanjiv Khanna for the current unrest: “Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, is responsible for all the civil wars happening in this country.”
He continued his criticism of the judiciary’s role in legislative affairs, stating, “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.”
Earlier, Dubey had taken to social media platform X, posting in Hindi: “If the Supreme Court makes the law, then the Parliament House should be closed down.”
His remarks triggered strong political backlash. Congress leader Manickam Tagore termed Dubey’s statement “defamatory” and said, “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.”
Congress MP Imran Masood also condemned the comments, calling them “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.”
Adding to the institutional tensions, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar voiced disapproval of the Supreme Court’s recent move to set a timeline for the President of India to act on bills passed by Parliament.
Speaking at the Valedictory Function of the sixth Rajya Sabha Internship Programme on April 17, Dhankhar had 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).”
He also suggested an amendment to Article 145(3) and criticised the judiciary’s expansive use of Article 142: “Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against Democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24 x 7.”
Meanwhile, the political storm surrounding the Waqf (Amendment) Act intensified. Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Kalyan Banerjee demanded the resignation of BJP MP Jagdambika Pal, who heads the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Waqf Bill.
“He should resign immediately because of his nasty work. He is an undemocratic person. The Waqf Act has been passed solely on the basis of the number of members. I can assure that it will be declared unconstitutional,” Banerjee said.
In response, Pal defended his position and said: “I have said before, too, that if the report made by us is unconstitutional or interferes with religious freedom, then I will resign.”
The Centre, during the Supreme Court hearing on April 17, assured that it “would not denotify any ‘Waqf-by-user’ provision and would not include any non-Muslim members in the Central Waqf Council of state waqf boards”. This assurance came a day after the top court said it would consider staying those parts of the law.
Several petitions challenging the Act have claimed it discriminates against the Muslim community and violates their fundamental rights.
With Parliament, the judiciary and political parties at loggerheads over the balance of power and the future of the Waqf Act, the nation now finds itself at the crossroads of constitutional interpretation and political confrontation.