New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday strongly rebuked and dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking action against Maharashtra officials over an alleged breach of protocol during Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai’s visit to his home state on May 18, calling it a “trivial issue” and condemning the petitioner for seeking “cheap publicity.”
A bench of CJI Gavai and Justice A G Masih came down strongly on the petitioner, stating, “We highly deprecate such a practice. We are of the considered view that everybody concerned should not make a mountain out of a molehill.”
The CJI was visibly displeased that the matter had been escalated despite an official press note from the apex court urging the public and media to treat the issue as closed.
Background of the Controversy
The issue stems from the absence of key state officials at a felicitation event organized in Mumbai by the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa in honour of CJI Gavai – the first person from Maharashtra to hold the country’s top judicial post.
Speaking at the event, CJI Gavai remarked that constitutional organs must respect each other, and subtly expressed disappointment over the absence of senior officials including the Chief Secretary, Director General of Police (DGP), and Mumbai Police Commissioner.
In response, Chief Secretary Sujata Saunik, DGP Rashmi Shukla, and Commissioner of Police P Deven Bharti later met the CJI during his visit to Chaitya Bhoomi and reportedly expressed regret, even accompanying him to the airport.
Vice-President’s Support and Supreme Court Clarification
Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar, speaking at a book launch the next day in Delhi, supported the CJI’s statement, stressing that the Chief Justice’s comments were not personal but made in the interest of upholding the dignity of the office.
Amid growing media attention, the Supreme Court issued a press release urging the matter to be given a “quietus,” stating that the CJI had already accepted the regrets of those involved and did not wish for the issue to be exaggerated.
Court’s Final Observations
On Friday, the bench sternly rebuked the PIL petitioner for pursuing a matter already resolved.
“This is just to get your name published in newspapers,” CJI Gavai told the petitioner’s counsel. “If you are a lawyer practising in the Supreme Court, you should have given attention to the press note.”
In its order, the court clarified – “To make it clear, the CJI was not concerned about the treatment given to him as an individual, but was only concerned with the dignity of the office of the CJI as the head of one of the organs of democracy.”
CJI Gavai also gave a parting note of caution – “Do not file such ill-advised petitions, you are necessarily bringing controversy to the CJI office.”
With the matter now formally closed, the Supreme Court has reiterated its commitment to preserving the decorum and dignity of constitutional institutions while discouraging unnecessary litigation that serves no public interest.
