A dramatic scene unfolded in the Supreme Court on Friday when a petitioner appearing in person allegedly abused Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, threw papers inside the courtroom and disrupted proceedings before being escorted out by security personnel.
The incident occurred around 11 am before a partial working-day Bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and Alok Aradhe. The petitioner, identified as Prabal Pratap, introduced himself as "the sovereign" and addressed the judges as "judicial servants."
He demanded that the court direct the registration of an FIR against the Additional Superintendent of Police (ASP), Lucknow, alleging involvement in a cybercrime syndicate.
Judges' response
Surprised by his remarks, Justice Viswanathan asked, "You are ordering me? You are ordering us?" The petitioner then allegedly began verbally abusing the Chief Justice of India and threw papers into the air, interrupting the court proceedings. Security personnel immediately intervened, escorted him out of the courtroom and briefly detained him in the security office within the court premises.
Despite the disruption, the Bench decided not to initiate contempt proceedings or any other coercive action against the petitioner. Dismissing his Special Leave Petition (SLP), Justice Viswanathan said the court found no grounds to interfere with the Allahabad High Court's order. He later observed that the petitioner appeared to be "very disturbed" and said the court had "only sympathies for him."
What was the case about?
The case stemmed from the petitioner's challenge to an Allahabad High Court order that upheld a decision of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Customs), Lucknow, to treat his application as a private complaint instead of directing the registration of an FIR. The High Court had ruled that he had an effective alternative legal remedy and permitted him to approach the appropriate forum.
The Supreme Court found no reason to interfere and dismissed the petition.
Following the incident, the Supreme Court Arguing Counsel Association wrote to Chief Justice Surya Kant seeking strict action over the courtroom disruption.
The association also urged institutional intervention against the selective circulation of courtroom videos by certain YouTube channels, social media accounts and self-styled journalists, alleging that such content undermines public confidence in the judiciary and calling for measures to safeguard the institution's dignity, independence and authority.
