New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses from the Centre, Central Bureau of Investigation and Bar Council of India on a petition alleging that oral observations made by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant were taken out of context, edited and commercially circulated online.
A bench headed by CJI Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, issued notices on the plea filed by lawyer Raja Choudhary. The petition also seeks an inquiry into allegations involving fake advocates, fraudulent law degrees and individuals linked to the satirical Cockroach Janta Party, or CJP.
The case stems from observations made during a May 15 hearing concerning professional standards within the legal profession. During the proceedings, the bench discussed issues including alleged misuse of judicial processes and the conferment of Senior Advocate designations.
According to the petition, references involving “cockroaches” were later extracted from the larger discussion and circulated through memes, videos and other digital content. It alleges that the material was subsequently monetised across social media platforms.
The plea argues that the matter is not about restricting criticism of the judiciary, political satire or freedom of expression. Instead, it alleges organised commercial exploitation, trademark appropriation and deliberate distortion of courtroom observations.
The controversy began after the CJI referred to some unemployed youngsters as “cockroaches” while discussing people who were allegedly moving towards social media and RTI activism rather than pursuing legal practice. The remark sparked widespread online reaction and contributed to the emergence of the satirical Cockroach Janta Party.
The CJI later clarified that the observation was directed at individuals allegedly using forged qualifications and fake degrees, rather than unemployed youth generally.
The petition also refers to the group’s subsequent political activities and seeks action against those allegedly involved in the commercial exploitation and unauthorised use of judicial remarks.
