2018 Supreme Court of India crisis

2018 Supreme Court of India crisis
Jasti Chelameswar (top left), Ranjan Gogoi (top right), Kurian Joseph (bottom left) and Madan Lokur (bottom right)
Date12 January–23 April 2018[a]
Cause
  • Criticism of the allocation of cases by Chief Justice Dipak Misra
  • Alleged loss of Supreme Court integrity
Motive
  • Reforms to Supreme Court administration
ParticipantsJasti Chelameswar
Ranjan Gogoi
Kurian Joseph
Madan Lokur
OutcomeProposed impeachment of Dipak Misra
Changes to the Supreme Court roster

The 2018 Supreme Court of India crisis was a period of institutional crisis in the Judiciary of India, aggravated after a press conference criticising the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra was given on 12 January 2018 by the four most senior Supreme Court judges (after Misra): Jasti Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur, and Kurian Joseph. The press conference was the first such given by Supreme Court judges in the history of India.

Tensions within the Supreme Court emerged in 2017 over disagreements in the allocation and handling of cases. These issues came from cases involving a medical-college scam case in November 2017 and petitions calling for investigations into the death of judge B.H. Loya. The four judges raised their concerns with Misra in the months between November 2017 and the Loya case in January 2018, arguing that the established conventions on the composition of benches were not being followed. Attempts to resolve these disputes between the judges and Misra were unsuccessful.

On the day of the Loya hearing, the media were called to Chelameswar's residence in New Delhi. In the press conference, Chelameswar warned that democracy would "not survive" in the country unless the institution was "preserved", and asserted that their "efforts failed" in trying to convince Misra to take "remedial measures". The four judges alleged certain politically controversial cases were allocated to such benches which give favourable judgements towards a political party, and released a letter to the public which they had addressed to Misra months before outlining their concerns. Reaction to the conference was mixed, with some praising the judges for demonstrating transparency and accountability, while others criticised the impact the press conference would have on the public image of the Supreme Court.

Days after the press conference, Misra released a list of seven important cases to be heard by constitution benches which excluded all four of the judges who spoke against him. In April, an opposition-led motion in the Rajya Sabha to impeach Misra received 64 signatures by MPs but was rejected by Venkaiah Naidu. The crisis led to speculation as to whether Misra would recommend Gogoi as his successor, but he did so in September 2018. In August 2020, a Supreme Court bench stated that they hoped it was the "first and the last" time judges would go to the press.

Background

Dipak Misra became the 45th Chief Justice of India in August 2017. The Supreme Court collegium by January 2018 consisted of Misra, along with the four next most-senior judges — Jasti Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur, and Kurian Joseph.[1] Chelameswar was appointed to the Supreme Court on 10 October 2011, while Gogoi was appointed on 23 April 2012. Lokur became a Supreme Court judge on 4 June 2012, and Joseph was appointed on 8 March 2013.[2]

Politically charged cases that came before the Supreme Court were traditionally overseen by the most senior judges of the court.[3]

Prelude (2017–2018)

Medical college scam case

Chief Justice Dipak Misra (pictured) asserted that he was the "master of the roster".

The Medical Council of India and Union Ministry of Health barred 46 private medical colleges from admitting students in 2017 due to alleged irregularities.[4] One of these included the Prasad Institute of Medical Sciences, run by the Prasad Education Trust.[5] Former judge I. M. Quddusi was allegedly approached to help orchestrate a multi-crore plot to achieve a favourable order from the Supreme Court to help settle debarment of the college.[6][7] Quddusi was arrested along with five others in September 2017 by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).[6]

A petition was filed by a legal reform group seeking the setting up of an independent probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by a retired Chief Justice of India (CJI). The petition suggested the probe was needed as there was an alleged attempt to bribe Supreme Court judges. Other issues raised by the petitioners included the possibility of bias if Misra or other judges considered a case where they had a possible connection; Misra, Amitava Roy and A.M. Khanwilkar previously heard a plea filed by the trust in August 2017. Jasti Chelameswar, the most senior-judge after Misra, admitted the petition on 8 November but Misra reportedly overturned the decision, and the case was instead allocated to a bench consisting of Arjan Kumar Sikri and Ashok Bhushan.[3][8]

On 9 November, a new petition in the case was filed by Kamini Jaiswal with Chelameswar. He noted its "disturbing" allegations and ordered a hearing by a constitution bench for 13 November. Chelameswar gave the order despite being delivered a note from Misra during the proceedings, which asked him not to make a decision in the case.[3] On 10 November, a bench led by Misra annulled Chelameswar's order,[9] with Misra telling the court that he as the chief justice was the master of the roster and had the power to decide the schedule and roster of the court.[3][8] The case was later referred to a bench headed by Rajesh Kumar Agrawal, and dismissed on 1 December with the petitioners being fined ₹25 lakh (US$26,000).[10]

Loya case allocation

Special CBI Judge B.H. Loya was presiding over Sohrabuddin encounter case when he died in 2014. BJP President Amit Shah, who was then the state home minister of Gujarat, and Rohith Shah were accused in the case.[11][12] Around two weeks after Loya's death, the judge who replaced him in the case discharged Shah and ruled out the trial. In November 2017, the Caravan reported that Loya's family raised doubts over the circumstances of his death, and called for an inquiry.[13] Members of his family alleged that he was offered a ₹100 crore (US$10 million) to rule in favour of Shah days before his death. Medical records showed that Loya died of a cardiac arrest.[14]

On 10 January 2018, the Bombay High Court admitted a petition seeking a probe into Loya's death, which was set for 23 January. However, the Supreme Court intervened on 12 January and heard two similar petitions, listed to be heard in court 10. The bench comprised Arun Kumar Mishra and Mohan Shantanagoudar, who were 10th and 22nd in seniority respectively out of the 25 Supreme Court judges.[15]

Press conference (January 2018)

Misra meeting and lead-up

On 12 January 2018, Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur and Kurian Joseph met with Chief Justice of India (CJI) Misra and requested for the Loya case, which was alleged to be politically sensitive, to be shifted away from the court of Arun Kumar Mishra to a more senior court. Misra refused the request of the judges. After finishing their work, the media was called to Chelameswar's residence in New Delhi at noon of the same day for a press conference.[16][17]

Issues raised by the judges

In the press conference, Chelameswar said "we tried to collectively persuade the chief justice that certain things are not in order and therefore you should take remedial measures....Unfortunately, our efforts failed." He also said "that unless this institution is preserved and it maintains its equanimity, democracy will not survive in this country." Gogoi, responding to queries over the morning meeting with Misra, stated that "it was the issue of an assignment of a case", and went on to say that "since all our efforts to convince the CJI that an appropriate decision has to be taken failed, we had no other option but to communicate it to the nation".[15][18] When asked whether he wanted Misra impeached, Chelameswar said "let the nation decide".[19]

The Times of India reported that the judges listed five main complaints they alleged was wrong with the Supreme Court under Misra's tenure as CJI:[20]

  1. The allocation of important cases to CJI-led benches and not to other senior judge-headed benches
  2. Cases that had significant consequences for the judiciary and country were assigned by Misra based on preference rather than rationality
  3. The Loya case was not allocated to any of their four benches
  4. The allocation of the medical college admissions scam to a more junior bench after Chelameswar was overruled by Misra
  5. Misra heading a smaller bench on the memorandum of procedure when it was heard previously by a five-judge bench

Also on 12 January, the judges made public a letter which they had sent Misra two months ago (with no specified date) but received no response to.[21][22] In the letter, the four judges stated that there were "instances where cases having far-reaching consequences for the nation and the institution had been assigned by the chief justice of this court selectively to the benches ‘of their preference’ without any rationale for this assignment. This must be guarded against at all costs."[3]

Chelameswar finished the conference by stating "we don't want wise men saying 20 years from now that justice Chelameswar, [Ranjan] Gogoi, [Madan B] Lokur and Kurian Joseph sold their souls and didn't do the right thing by our constitution."[3]

Analysis

Chelameswar described the press conference as an "extraordinary event in the history of any nation, and of this institution, the judiciary".[23] The press conference was the first such instance in the history of the country.[24]

Reaction

Political figures

  • Attorney General K. K. Venugopal said that the event "could have been avoided", and called for the judges to show "statesmanship" to ensure "complete harmony".[27]
  • Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) K. G. Balakrishnan argued that the judges should have settled their differences among themselves rather than going public.[29]
  • Former CJI Rajendra Mal Lodha said that the judiciary's image was "dented and would take a long time to repair". He also said the "grievances" of the four judges were "not addressed" which is "why they did this".[30]
  • Former Supreme Court judge RS Sodhi called for the impeachment of the four judges. Senior advocate K. T. S. Tulsi described the conference as "shocking".[28]
  • Former Supreme Court judge and Solicitor General N. Santosh Hegde said that he was "devastated" and that the press conference had caused "irreparable" damage to the institution.[31]
  • Former Attorney General Soli Sorabjee said that it would have "serious repercussions for the public image of the judiciary and the Indian Constitution".[30]
  • Senior advocate Indira Jaising described the press conference as "historic", and praised the judges for "having coming out and been accountable to the nation", but said that they did not go "far enough".[30]

Public opinion

Public opinion on the press conference was divided. Some supported the decision of the judges, while others criticised them for taking their concerns to the media.[29]

Aftermath (January–April 2018)

Immediate aftermath and Loya case

Attorney General, K. K. Venugopal (pictured) said that "everything" had been "settled" between the judges.

Following the press conference, on 15 January, Misra met with the four judges informally in a meeting over tea. The Attorney General, K. K. Venugopal, subsequently said that "everything" had been "settled", and that the courts were "functioning". The Bar Council of India also state that its members had met with 15 Supreme Court judges and were assured that the crisis had been "resolved".[32] On the same day, Arun Kumar Mishra reportedly became emotional while in the informal morning gathering at the judges' lounge. Mishra reportedly felt that he had been "unfairly" targeted by the four judges, but was comforted by Chelameswar who expressed that they were not trying to criticise him but rather raise issues.[33] The following day, on 16 January, the bench headed by Mishra ruled that the case should be put before an "appropriate bench".[34]

A bench headed by Misra, and consisting of A. M. Khanwilkar and Dhanajaya Y. Chandrachud, was subsequently allocated to hear the case.[35] On 19 April, the bench ruled that Loya had died of a natural cardiac arrest and rejected the petitions seeking an independent investigation into the death of Loya.[36] Following the verdict, Rahul Gandhi said that most Indians "instinctively" understood the truth about Amit Shah, and said that the truth "had its own way of catching up on people like him".[37]

Changes to the roster

On 16 January, shortly after the press conference, Misra released a list of seven important cases to be heard by constitution benches, in which all four judges who spoke against him were excluded from.[38] The constitution bench, which was formed earlier to hear a matter on the validity of aadhaar, consisted of five judges: Misra, Arjun Kumar Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, A. M. Khanwilkar and Dhanajaya Y. Chandrachud. The seven other important cases that the bench was assigned were a case on taxation, entry of women to Sabarimala, a consumer law case, the right of Parsi women to enter the fire temple if they marry outside the community, a challenge to the Indian Penal Code (IPC) provision that only men can be charged for adultery, the challenge to Section 377, and a petition of whether politicians facing criminal charges should be disqualified from elections.[39] The same combination of judges had heard various constitutional issues since 10 October 2017, including on euthanasia and issues of jurisdiction between the central government and the Delhi government.[40]

On 1 February, Misra updated the roster, which the changes coming into effect on 5 February.[41] He allocated himself public interest petitions, while Chelameswar was given cases related to indirect taxes, labour, consumer protection and criminal cases. Gogoi was allocated crime, labour, indirect tax, personal law and religion cases, and Lokur was given ecology, mines and minerals, consumer protection, armed forces and paramilitary forces, and personal law. Joseph was allocated crime, labour and family law issues.[42]

Proposed impeachment of Misra

Vice President Venkaiah Naidu (right) rejected the impeachment motion against Misra (left).

The day after the outcome of the Loya case, on 20 April 2018, seven opposition parties in the Rajya Sabha submitted a petition to the Vice President Venkaiah Naidu seeking impeachment of Misra. This marked the first time that any such motion had been moved against a Chief Justice of India.[43] The same day, a bench composed of Arjun Kumar Sikri and Ashok Bhushan described the public statements of impeachment made by lawmakers and politicians as "unfortunate", and said that they were "all very disturbed about it".[44]

The seven parties were: Indian National Congress, Nationalist Congress Party, Bahujan Samaj Party, Communist Party of India, Communist Party of India (Marxist), Indian Union Muslim League, and the Samajwadi Party. Nominated member K.T.S. Tulsi also signed the petition. The Leader of the Opposition, Ghulam Nabi Azad, stated that the timing of the impeachment motion was unrelated to the Loya verdict.[43]

There were 5 alleged charges against Misra in the impeachment motion (summarised and listed below):[45]

  1. Facts and circumstances in the medical college scam case suggested that Misra may have been involved in some of the conspiracy, which warranted investigation.
  2. That he dealt with a petition which he likely fell under the scope of, violating the first principle of the code of conduct for judges.
  3. He appeared to have antedated an administrative order on 6 November 2017, which amounted to serious forgery or fabrication.
  4. That Misra acquired land as an advocate by giving an affidavit found to be false which was only surrendered in 2012.
  5. Misra abused his authority as master of the roster in politically sensitive cases to achieve a predetermined outcome.

There were originally signatures from 71 parliamentarians, but 7 had since retired when the petition was submitted, leaving the total at 64 which met the required threshold of 50 Rajya Sabha MPs to submit the motion.[46] Former prime minister Manmohan Singh and former finance minister P. Chidambaram were not signatories. 19 MPs who had signed the motion were reported in the media, including D.P. Tripathi who was one of the MPs who had retired before the list was submitted.[47]

On 23 April 2018, the petition was rejected by Venkaiah Naidu in a 10-page order.[48] Naidu met with Attorney General K. K. Venugopal, former secretary generals of the Lok Sabha and other legal experts and based his decision from the consultations he held.[49] In the order, Naidu said that MPs "unsure of their own cause", and that phrases used indicated "mere suspicion, a conjecture or an assumption" which did not satisfy the proof beyond reasonable doubt criteria needed make a case for proved misbehaviour under Article 124. The order alleged that the allegations in the impeachment motion had a "serious tendency of undermining the judiciary" of India, and also that there was "virtually no concrete viable imputation" in evidence to proceed further.[50]

Later impact under Misra (April–October 2018)

Role and powers of the Chief Justice

Former law minister Shanti Bhushan (pictured) filed a petition calling for a panel of senior judges to decide the roster.

A petition was filed advocate by Asok Pande which argued that "unfettered power was being exercised by the Chief Justices in the matter of formation of benches" and called for the way in which cases are assigned to be changed.[51] A bench of Misra, Khanwilkar and Chandrachud rejected the petition on 11 April. Chandrachud, writing for the bench, stated that "the Chief Justice of India is first among equals and has the authority to decide allocation of cases and setting up of benches".[52] The order also stated that as the CJI was a high constitutional functionary, there could not be "any distrust about the responsibilities he discharges", and described the petition as "scandalous".[53]

In April, former law minister Shanti Bhushan filed a petition which argued that Misra had "placed matters of general public importance and/or political sensitivity before only certain benches", and called for a panel of senior judges to decide the roster.[10] On 6 July, a bench of Sikri and Ashok Bhushan for the third time (following the previous November and April cases) ruled that the CJI was the master of the roster, and they added that he was "empowered to exercise leadership in administration of the court which includes assignment of cases". The bench stated that there "was no dispute that Chief Justice is the Master of Roster".[54][55]

Ranjan Gogoi recommendation

In the months leading up to Misra's retirement, there was speculation as to whether he would recommend Gogoi as his successor due to Gogoi's involvement in the press conference. Under convention, the Chief Justice recommends the name of their successor a month before they are due to retire. This convention was broken in the recent years before the crisis, with S. H. Kapadia delaying the recommendation of his successor Altamas Kabir. Kabir then did the same with his successor P. Sathasivam, but Sathasivam then restored the convention in recommending Rajendra Mal Lodha exactly a month before his retirement.[56]

Amit Shah increased speculation over the appointment of Gogoi by stating that the government would follow "what the chief justice recommends". On 18 June, the law minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, stated in a press conference that "there was no reason to doubt the intention of the government. There is a convention in place and let CJI forward the name of his successor and then the government would discuss on it."[57][58]

On 4 September, Misra followed the convention (as 2 September and 3 September were public holidays) and, a month before his retirement, recommended Gogoi as the next Chief Justice to the president of India, Ram Nath Kovind. In his letter to Prasad, Misra wrote "I recommend Justice Gogoi as my successor to the post of Chief Justice of India".[56][59] On 26 September, a bench of Chief Justice Misra, A. M. Khanwilkar, and Chandrachud dismissed the plea which challenged Gogoi's appointment as Chief Justice over his role in the crisis.[60][61] Gogoi was sworn in as Chief Justice on 3 October.[62]

Legacy

Commentary on the crisis by judges

Sharad Arvind Bobde (pictured) said the crisis was "one of the most unfortunate events in the history of the Supreme Court".

After Chelameswar retired, he stated that the "press conference has not achieved in the complete sense the result it should have, but it certainly has created awareness in this country that this institution is also required to be protected and its activities should be assessed periodically. That awareness is certainly there today". Following his retirement, Joseph argued that "you cannot say that the issues have been completely addressed. It will take some time for the systems to change. Changes were brought in by the previous Chief Justice of India [Misra] and the present CJI [Gogoi] is carrying it forward. Process of change will take time".[63]

In 2023, former Chief Justice Sharad Bobde, who was a sitting judge at the time of the crisis, stated that the press conference was "one of the most unfortunate events in the history of the Supreme Court. He also stated "I tried my best to prevent it", and that he would not have done himself.[64]

Judicial impact

Gogoi's collegium consisted of Arjun Kumar Sikri (until his retirement on 3 March 2019), Sharad Arvind Bobde, N.V. Ramana, and Arun Kumar Mishra; Rohinton Fali Nariman joined the collegium following the retirement of Sikri.[56] As Chief Justice, Gogoi started interacting with other senior judges in matters relating to the running of the courts.[63]

In August 2020, a verdict by a three-judge bench headed by Arun Mishra, stated "we hope it was the first and the last occasion that the judges have gone to press, and God gives wisdom to protect its dignity by internal mechanism, particularly, when allegations made, if any, publicly cannot be met by sufferer judges. It would cause suffering to them till eternity."[65][66]

Notes

  1. ↑ Dates are from day of press conference to rejection of the impeachment of Misra by Venkaiah Naidu

See also

References

Citations

  1. ↑ "The Supreme Court's Collegium Resolutions: An Empty Formality?". Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. 15 February 2022. Retrieved 2026-08-19.
  2. ↑ "What the rift in SC is about". The Times of India. 13 January 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Safi, Michael (14 November 2017). "India supreme court 'in crisis' over retired judge corruption case". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  4. ↑ "Retired Odisha HC judge booked and raided by CBI". The Times of India. 20 September 2017. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  5. ↑ "SC reserves order in medical college bribery scam". ANI News. 27 November 2017. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  6. 1 2 "CBI charges retd HC judge, 6 others in medical college case". The Times of India. 25 July 2019. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  7. ↑ "Ex-judge Quddusi, associate spoke using code words: CBI". Hindustan Times. 10 January 2020. Retrieved 2026-08-19.
  8. 1 2 "Corruption Allegations and Courtroom Drama: What Happened in the Chief Justice's Court Yesterday?". caravanmagazine.in. 11 November 2017. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  9. ↑ Dutta, Prabhash K. (10 November 2017). "How a medical admission scam led to clash between top two judges of Supreme Court". India Today. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  10. 1 2 Shroff, Kaushal (21 April 2018). "Master of the Roster: As Chief Justice Dipak Misra Faces Motion for his Removal, Shanti Bhushan's Petition Points to Ten Instances of "Hand-Picking Benches"". caravanmagazine.in. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  11. ↑ "Top 4 SC judges revolt against Chief Justice, question 'biased decisions'". Deccan Chronicle. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 12 January 2018.
  12. ↑ "CJI has not addressed crisis in judiciary, democracy at stake, say top Supreme Court judges". Scroll.in. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  13. ↑ "Now, CBI judge Loya's son Anuj claims family has no suspicions about his death". Scroll.in. 29 November 2017. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  14. ↑ "Five-Point Guide To The Judge Loya Controversy". www.ndtv.com. Archived from the original on 26 September 2025. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  15. 1 2 ""Unless This Institution Is Preserved … Democracy Will Not Survive": On the Day of the Loya Hearing, Four Senior Judges of the Supreme Court Speak Out". caravanmagazine.in. Retrieved 2026-08-19.
  16. ↑ "Final trigger: Rejection of demand for senior bench to hear PIL on Judge Loya's death". The Times of India. 13 January 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  17. ↑ "Top judges angry about functioning of India's Supreme Court". Fox News. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 12 January 2018.
  18. ↑ "India Supreme Court judges: Democracy is in danger". BBC News. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 12 January 2018.
  19. ↑ "Rebellion at the Supreme Court: 4 judges led by Justice Chelameswar take on CJI". The News Minute. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  20. ↑ "Senior SC judges' press conference: Five main issues that annoyed them". The Times of India. 12 January 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  21. ↑ "Turmoil in Supreme Court: Top developments". The Times of India. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 12 January 2018.
  22. ↑ Ashok Sharma (12 January 2018). "Judges angry about functioning of India's Supreme Court". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 12 January 2018. Retrieved 12 January 2018.
  23. ↑ "Crisis of confidence". Frontline. 31 January 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  24. ↑ Yamunan, Sruthisagar (31 December 2018). "From impeachment motion to internal rift, 2018 was a year of tumult for India's judiciary". Scroll.in. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  25. ↑ "PM Narendra Modi says government, political parties should stay away from current judicial crisis". The New Indian Express. 22 January 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  26. ↑ Vaidyanathan, A. (13 January 2018). "Democracy At Stake, Things Not In Order: 4 Supreme Court Judges - 10 Points". NDTV.
  27. 1 2 3 "Highlights: Judge Loya's Death Must Be Probed At Highest Level Of Supreme Court, Says Rahul Gandhi". NDTV. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  28. 1 2 "Stunning mutiny in Supreme Court ranks, 4 judges take on Chief Justice of India". The Economic Times. 12 January 2018. Retrieved 12 January 2018.
  29. 1 2 Khurshid 2020, p. 107.
  30. 1 2 3 "Former SC Judges & Lawyers React to SC Judges' Press Briefing". TheQuint. 2018-01-12. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  31. ↑ "India's top judges in public spat". dw.com. Retrieved 2026-08-19.
  32. ↑ "All Settled, Says Centre's Lawyer On Top Court Judges' Rift: 10 Facts". NDTV. 15 January 2018.
  33. ↑ "Supreme Court Judge Assigned Judge Loya Case Broke Down: Report". NDTV.com. Archived from the original on 10 February 2024. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  34. ↑ "Justice Mishra-led bench asks CJI to put Loya's case before 'appropriate bench'". The Times of India. 17 January 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 2026-08-19.
  35. ↑ "CJI Dipak Misra's bench to hear Judge Loya's case". National Herald. 20 January 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  36. ↑ "Full text of Supreme Court judgement declining a fresh probe on Judge B.H. Loya's death". ThePrint. 19 April 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  37. ↑ "'Truth will catch up': Rahul Gandhi targets Amit Shah after judge Loya verdict". The Times of India. 19 April 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  38. ↑ Dev, Atul (1 July 2018). "Dipak Misra's shadow over the Supreme Court". The Caravan. Retrieved 16 August 2019.
  39. ↑ "Four judges who criticised CJI Dipak Misra not on Bench that will hear 7 key matters". The Indian Express. 16 January 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  40. ↑ "Four Dissenting Judges Excluded From Constitution Bench Hearing Seven Key Matters". The Wire. 16 January 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  41. ↑ "SC revises its roster system: Here's the full text". The New Indian Express. 1 February 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  42. ↑ Vaidyanathan, A. (1 February 2018). "After Rift, Chief Justice Dipak Misra Makes Public Supreme Court Judges' Roster". NDTV. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  43. 1 2 "Congress, others submit impeachment notice against CJI Dipak Misra on grounds of 'misbehaviour'". Hindustan Times. 20 April 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  44. ↑ "Public statements on impeachment of judges unfortunate: Supreme Court". The Hindu. 20 April 2018. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  45. ↑ Vishwanath, Apurva (20 April 2018). "5 reasons behind the historic impeachment motion moved against CJI Dipak Misra by Congress". ThePrint. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  46. ↑ "Chief Justice Dipak Misra Faces Impeachment Motion, 71 Have Signed: 10 Facts". NDTV.com. Retrieved 2018-04-20.
  47. ↑ "Manmohan Singh, P Chidambaram not among signatories to impeachment notice against CJI". The Times of India. 20 April 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  48. ↑ Phukan, Sandeep (23 April 2018). "Venkaiah Naidu rejects impeachment notice against CJI; Opposition MPs are "unsure of their own case," he says". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 11 May 2023.
  49. ↑ "Congress, BJP spar after Venkaiah Naidu rejects CJI Dipak Misra impeachment motion". India Today. 23 April 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  50. ↑ "10 reasons why Venkaiah Naidu rejected the impeachment notice against CJI Dipak Misra". The Times of India. 23 April 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 19 August 2026.
  51. ↑ Vaidyanathan, A. (11 April 2018). "Can't Distrust Chief Justice, Plea "Scandalous", Says Supreme Court: 10 Facts". NDTV. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  52. ↑ "Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Guidelines on Case Allocation". The Wire. 11 April 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  53. ↑ "SC says CJI first among equals, no room for doubt, plea scandalous; updates". Business Standard. 11 April 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  54. ↑ Vaidyanathan, A. (6 July 2018). "Chief Justice Master Of Roster, Has Power To Assign Cases: Supreme Court". NDTV. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  55. ↑ "CJI is Master of Roster, Supreme Court rules for the third time". The New Indian Express. 7 July 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  56. 1 2 3 "CJI Dipak Misra names Ranjan Gogoi, one of four SC judges who spoke out, as successor". The Times of India. 5 September 2018. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  57. ↑ Chhibber, Maneesh (25 June 2018). "Not CJI Misra, constitutional morality & law will ensure Justice Gogoi is next top judge". ThePrint. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  58. ↑ Singh, Paras Nath (26 June 2018). "Will Justice Ranjan Gogoi be superseded? Ask this question to the CJI, not Law Minister". The Leaflet. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  59. ↑ Rautray, Samanwaya (2018-09-05). "CJI follows convention, recommends Justice Gogoi's name as successor". The Economic Times. ISSN 0013-0389. Retrieved 2026-08-20.
  60. ↑ "Plea challenging Justice Ranjan Gogoi's appointment as next CJI rejected". Northeast Now. 26 September 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  61. ↑ "Supreme Court dismisses plea challenging appointment of Ranjan Gogoi as next chief justice". Scroll.in. 26 September 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  62. ↑ "Justice Ranjan Gogoi sworn in as Chief Justice of India". The Indian Express. 3 October 2018. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  63. 1 2 "A year after landmark press conference, little has changed in Supreme Court's running". Hindustan Times. 12 January 2019. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  64. ↑ Kakkar, Shruti (19 March 2023). "Press meet of four SC judges in 2018 'most unfortunate': Former CJI Bobde". The New Indian Express. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  65. ↑ Sinha, Bhadra (31 August 2020). "Hope 2018 press conference was first & last time judges went to media — SC in Bhushan verdict". ThePrint. Retrieved 20 August 2026.
  66. ↑ Mishra, Soni (31 January 2021). "Questions raised by Supreme Court justices' presser in 2018 still haunt judiciary". theweek. Retrieved 20 August 2026.

Bibliography

  • Khurshid, Salman; Malik, Lokendra; Singh, Yogesh Pratap (2020). The Supreme Court and the Constitution An Indian Discourse. Wolters Kluwer (India) Pvt Limited. ISBN 9789389859713.
This page is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.