How can you give direction to appointing authority? BJP leader slams SC

Bharatiya Janata Party leader Nishikant Dubey on Saturday alleged that the Supreme Court is responsible for "inciting religious wars" in the country, saying the Parliament building should be closed down if the apex court has to make the laws.

"The top court has only one aim 'Show me the face, will show you the law'. The Supreme Court is going beyond its limits. If one has to go to the Supreme Court for everything, then Parliament and State Assembly should be shut," Dubey told ANI.

"There was an Article 377 in which homosexuality is a big crime. The Trump administration has said that there are only two sexes in this world, either male or female...Whether it is Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh, all believe that homosexuality is a crime. One fine morning, the Supreme Court said that we abolish this case...Article 141 says that the laws we make, the judgments we give, are applicable from the lower court to the Supreme Court. Article 368 says that Parliament has the right to make all laws and the Supreme Court has the right to interpret the law. The top court is asking the President and Governor to tell what they have to go regarding the Bills. When Ram Mandir or Krishna Janamboomi or Gyanvapi comes, you (SC) says 'Show us the paper'. Mughals ke aane ke baad jo Masjid banne hai unke liye keh raho ho paper kaha se dikhao," he added.

The BJP leader further alleged that the Supreme Court want to take this country towards "anarchy."

"How can you give direction to the appointing authority? The President appoints the Chief Justice of India. The Parliament makes the law of this country. You will dictate that Parliament?... How did you make a new law? In which law is it written that the President has to take a decision within three months? This means that you want to take this country towards anarchy. When the Parliament sits, there will be a detailed discussion on this," Dubey said.

Earlier today, in a post on X in Hindi, Nishikant Dubey criticised the Supreme Court, stating, "If the Supreme Court makes the law, then the Parliament House should be closed down."

His comment came amid the ongoing hearing in the Supreme Court over several petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

Notably, the Centre had assured the Supreme Court during the hearing held on April 17 that it would not denotify any 'Waqf-by-user' provision and would not include any non-Muslim members in the Board. The assurance comes a day after the top court said it will consider staying those parts of the law.

The Congress leaders attacked Nishikant Dubey over his statement on the Supreme Court and said that the latter continuously "demolishes" all other institutions.

Congress leader Manickam Tagore termed Nishikant Dubey's statement on the Supreme Court "defamatory," and said that his attack on the top court is "not acceptable."

"This is a defamatory statement against the Supreme Court. Nishikant Dubey is a person who continuously demolishes all other institutions. Now, he has attacked the Supreme Court. I hope that the Supreme Court judges will take this into notice as he is not speaking in Parliament but outside it. His attack on the Supreme Court is not acceptable," Tagore told ANI.

Congress MP Imran Masood said that the reported statement made by the BJP leader is "unfortunate."

"The kinds of statements that are coming against the Supreme Court are very unfortunate...This is not the first time that the Supreme Court has given a decision against the full majority government...This frustration is incomprehensible," Masood said.

The Supreme Court's recent decision to set a timeline for the President of India to take a decision on the bills sent to her has also triggered a debate, with Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar voicing disapproval of the judgment.

Earlier on April 17, Jagdeep Dhankhar said India cannot have a situation where the judiciary directs the President, adding that Article 142 of the Constitution has become a "nuclear missile against democratic forces for the judiciary.

Speaking at the Valedictory Function of the sixth Rajya Sabha Internship Programme, Dhankhar proposed an amendment to Article 145(3), which deals with the composition of the bench required to decide substantial questions of constitutional law.

"We cannot have a situation where you direct the President of India ,and on what basis? The only right you have under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution under Article 145(3). There, it has to be five judges or more. When Article 145(3) was there, the number of judges in the Supreme Court was eight, 5 out of 8, now 5 out of 30 and odd. But forget about it; the judges who issued a mandamus virtually to the President and presented a scenario that it would be the law of the land have forgotten the power of the Constitution. How can that combination of judges deal with something under Article 145(3) if preserved, it was then for five out of eight. We also need to make amends for that now. Five out of eight would mean interpretation will be by majority. Well, five constitutes more than the majority in eight. But leave that aside. Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against Democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24 x 7," Dhankar said.