A controversial X post, its subsequent withdrawal and a bar association resolution have brought the relationship between political criticism and judicial independence into focus.
NEW DELHI, October 12, 2026: The Kerala unit of the Indian National Congress has deleted a social media post demanding Chief Justice of India Surya Kant’s resignation, following criticism from BJP leaders and condemnation by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA).
The post challenged the Chief Justice over his reported remarks concerning law and order during protests in Delhi. Its removal is an important development: readers encountering screenshots should understand that these show a withdrawn post, rather than a statement that remains on the account. The Week and Business Today reported the withdrawal.
What Did the Congress Account Say?
According to published reports reproducing the message, the Congress Kerala account addressed the Chief Justice by name and demanded that he resign if law and order was outside his domain. It also asserted that a replacement could be found.
The wording shifted the discussion from criticism of a particular judicial response to a demand directed personally at the head of the judiciary. BJP representatives criticised the post as an attempt to intimidate an independent constitutional institution. These descriptions are political accusations and should not be treated as judicial findings. Read Moneycontrol’s account of the exchange.
This controversy concerns the Indian National Congress’s Kerala unit, commonly identified with the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee. It should not be confused with the separate political parties that use “Kerala Congress” in their names.
What Has the Supreme Court Bar Association Issued?
In a resolution dated October 12, the SCBA condemned social media statements seeking CJI Surya Kant’s resignation. According to LiveLaw’s report, the association said such statements diminished the judiciary and attempted to interfere with the administration of justice.
The association emphasised that people could approach courts for remedies through the legal process. It urged its members and other individuals to preserve the Supreme Court’s dignity and decorum. The resolution was signed by honorary secretary Pragya Baghel. LiveLaw’s report on the SCBA resolution.
This is a bar association resolution, not a Supreme Court judgment or a court-issued show-cause notice. The reported resolution does not establish that the Congress account or any individual has been found guilty of contempt.
The Background: Delhi Protests and a Requested Meeting
The dispute developed against the background of opposition protests concerning Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, electoral issues and restrictions in Delhi.
Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge had requested an appointment with the Chief Justice to submit a memorandum. Its subjects included the Election Commission, alleged arbitrary arrests of students, Metro station closures and train cancellations.
SCC Times reported that the Chief Justice declined the meeting in a letter dated October 11 because the issues were already pending before the Supreme Court. Discussing pending cases through a separate meeting, he explained, would be incompatible with judicial propriety and the separation of powers. SCC Times explains the letter and the petition route.
The reported response distinguished the Court’s judicial role from administrative control over government operations. It also indicated that grievances could be raised through petitions. Declining a meeting therefore should not be described as an announcement that citizens could no longer seek judicial remedies.
How Did Congress and the BJP Respond?
Congress leader Pawan Khera disagreed with the resignation post, describing it as wrong and reaffirming the party’s confidence in the judiciary and respect for the Supreme Court, according to Amar Ujala. The disputed message was subsequently deleted.
Union minister Kiren Rijiju, meanwhile, accused Congress of targeting the judiciary and undermining constitutional institutions. His response formed part of the political backlash; it was not a legal determination about the post. NDTV reported the BJP reaction.
SCBA Had Also Raised Concerns About Lawyers’ Detention
The association’s position on the resignation demand should be read alongside its earlier intervention concerning protesters.
On October 10, SCBA sought the Chief Justice’s urgent intervention after reports that lawyers had been detained around the Supreme Court. Its resolution condemned what it described as excessive force and requested that the safety and whereabouts of detained advocates be established.
It also sought the release of those for whom there were no lawful grounds for detention and an examination of the circumstances. Those were concerns raised by the association, not final findings about individual police actions. Bar & Bench’s report on the October 10 resolution.
The two interventions addressed different questions: treatment of lawyers during protests, and the language used in calls for the Chief Justice’s resignation.
Related background: How the Cockroach Janta Party movement began, who leads it and what is known about its funding.
Can a Political Party Replace the Chief Justice?
A political party cannot replace a Chief Justice through a social media demand.
Article 124 of the Constitution provides that a Supreme Court judge may resign through a written communication addressed to the President. Removal is a separate constitutional process requiring an address by each House of Parliament, supported by specified majorities, on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity, followed by a presidential order.
The parliamentary requirement includes a majority of the total membership of each House and at least two-thirds of members present and voting. A political statement does not initiate or complete that process. Constitution of India, Article 124 — Government of India.
What Is the Latest Position?
The Congress Kerala post has been withdrawn, Pawan Khera has publicly disagreed with it, and SCBA has condemned resignation demands circulated on social media.
The material reviewed for this report does not establish a court-issued notice or contempt finding arising from this particular post. Any later legal proceeding should be reported separately, with the relevant order or case details.
Reporting note: The deleted X post and the October 12 SCBA resolution are described here through attributed published reports. The original deleted post and a directly authenticated copy of that resolution were not independently obtained for this report.
The National Desk covers India's politics, governance, security and public-interest news. Stories are checked against at least two credible sources before publication.
