NEW DELHI: Three months after CJI Surya Kant’s ‘cockroach’ remark sparked a storm and gave birth to Cockroach Janta Party that led a Gen Z protest against NEET-UG paper leak, Supreme Court Tuesday sought responses from govt and CBI on a PIL seeking action against those who commercially exploited the remark through clever editing of virtual court proceedings and draped it with a meaning that was never intended.During a half-an-hour long debate on the issue before a bench comprising CJI Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, petitioner-cum-advocate Raja Choudhary said it requires a deeper investigation as to how the word ‘cockroach’, used in a completely different context during judicial proceedings on May 15, was selectively picked, cleverly edited and commercially exploited to undermine judicial dignity and hurt institutional integrity. The petitioner sought a direction to authorities “to examine and take action in accordance with law against persons/entities allegedly involved in commercial exploitation, trademark appropriation, monetized circulation, or unauthorised commercial use of oral courtroom observations/metaphors, including activities of CJP, while recognising that fair criticism, democratic dissent, satire, and free speech remain permissible within the constitutional framework without undermining institutional dignity”.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
Referring to the May 15 hearing before a CJI-led bench on a petition ‘Sanjay Dubey Vs Registrar General of Delhi HC’, Choudhary emphasised the CJI had made the “cockroach” remark in the specific context of fake advocates, as he expressed “concerns regarding misuse of court process, deterioration of professional standards and how it impacted the institution itself”.He said post-May 15, there has been a quantum increase in clips of selectively edited judicial proceedings. The distorted versions and oral observations made during court proceedings are turned into memes and are circulated in social media for profit, said Chaudhary.He complained there is no mechanism against these sinister designs aimed at diminishing public faith in the institution and judges by showing them in poor light.
