CJI Surya Kant declines Opposition's meeting request, explains reasons in letter

Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant has declined a request by leaders of the Opposition INDIA bloc to meet him. Rahul Gandhi and other Opposition leaders had earlier sought time to meet him ahead of the bloc's march. The CJI replied through a letter, setting out why a meeting could not take place.

Speaking to the media before the day's agitation, CJI Surya Kant said: "Yesterday I received a letter requesting a meeting with the Opposition parties. I replied to it last night itself, explaining why I will not be able to meet. The doors of the Supreme Court are open to everyone. A petition from any ordinary citizen or any member of the people's representatives is welcome. Every Indian citizen has the right to seek justice in court. We will hear them and do what is right in accordance with the law."

Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge had written to the CJI seeking a meeting between 4 pm and 5 pm on Monday. They wanted to hand over a memorandum. It demanded that "vote chori" be stopped, that Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar resign, that the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls be halted, and that the country return to the ballot paper system.

CJI Surya Kant had earlier too declined to meet Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over the allegations of "vote chori". The INDIA bloc had sought a meeting on the SIR and irregularities in the Election Commission's functioning. The CJI had then said that such matters were already pending before the Supreme Court. It is for this reason that a meeting at the administrative level is said to be inappropriate while the matter is sub judice.

In the same interaction, CJI Surya Kant was also asked about the cancellation of the Supreme Court visit of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on "One Nation, One Election". He said: "There are comparatively more reasons in this case, because a situation of possible conflict of interest had arisen in the court on that issue (regarding the JPC meeting on One Nation, One Election). Because of this, we had to discuss administrative matters. My senior judicial colleagues and I were collectively of the opinion that we should avoid any kind of conflict of interest."