The Supreme Court on Friday asked suspended AAP lawmaker Raghav Chadha to tender an unconditional apology to the Rajya Sabha Chairperson for his remarks against the judiciary. The court also expressed hope that the Chairperson would take a “sympathetic view” of the matter.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra recorded Chadha’s statement that he was willing to tender an unconditional apology to the Chairperson. The court then asked Chadha to do so and directed the Attorney General R Venkataramani to apprise it of the developments in the matter after the Diwali vacation.
Chadha was suspended from the Rajya Sabha for an indefinite period in August for allegedly making derogatory remarks against the judiciary. The suspension came after Chadha had accused the Supreme Court of “protecting” the BJP government.
The Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognizance of Chadha’s remarks and had issued a show-cause notice to him. Chadha had initially refused to apologize, but he later changed his mind and told the court that he was willing to do so.
The Supreme Court‘s order asking Chadha to tender an apology is a significant development. It comes at a time when there has been growing concern about the attacks on the judiciary by politicians and other public figures.
The Supreme Court’s order asking Chadha to tender an apology is a welcome step. It is important to uphold the dignity of the judiciary and to protect it from attacks. Chadha’s remarks were clearly derogatory and could have undermined the public’s trust in the judiciary.
The court’s order also sends a strong message to other politicians and public figures that they will not be allowed to get away with making derogatory remarks against the judiciary. The judiciary is an independent institution and it is important to respect its independence.
The Supreme Court’s order has several implications. First, it reaffirms the court’s commitment to upholding the dignity of the judiciary. Second, it sends a strong message to politicians and other public figures that they will not be allowed to get away with making derogatory remarks against the judiciary. Third, it could help to restore public trust in the judiciary.
The order also has implications for the relationship between the judiciary and the legislature. The legislature is the supreme law-making body in the country, but the judiciary has the power to review and strike down laws that it finds to be unconstitutional. This can lead to tensions between the two institutions.
The Supreme Court’s order in Chadha’s case could help to defuse some of these tensions. By asking Chadha to tender an apology, the court has shown that it is willing to take a conciliatory approach. This could help to improve the relationship between the two institutions and make it easier for them to work together.