Motivated Attacks on CJI Surya Kant are Unacceptable, Say 44 Retired Judges in Strong Public Statement

A total of 44 signatories consisting of two retired Supreme Court Judges, six High Court Chief Justices and 36 High Court Judges have strongly objected to the motivated campaign targeting the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant in the wake of his remarks in proceedings concerning Rohingya migrants, including the open letter dated 5 December 2025.

On December 2 while hearing a plea on the alleged custodial disappearance of Rohingya refugees, CJI Kant had asked if the Government of India had declared Rohingyas as 'refugees'. The Court was told by the petitioner that 5 Rohingyas were picked up by the Delhi police in May and there was no information about their whereabouts. Hearing this, the CJI had asked, "Where is the order of the Government of India declaring them as refugees? Refugee is a well defined legal term and there is a prescribed authority by the Government to declare them. If there is no legal status of a refugee, and somebody is an intruder, and he enters illegally, do we have an obligation to keep them here?"

The present statement has said that judicial proceedings can and should be subject to fair, reasoned criticism but what is being witnessed is not principled disagreement but an attempt to delegitimize the Judiciary by mischaracterizing a routine courtroom proceedings as an act of prejudice. The Chief Justice is being attacked for asking the most basic legal question: who, in law, has granted the status that is being claimed before the Court? No adjudication on rights or entitlements can proceed unless this threshold is first addressed, the letter adds.

Condemn the motivated attempts to distort the Court’s remarks and personalise disagreement into attacks on individual judges, the statement has supported consideration of a Court-monitored SIT into the illegal procurement of Indian identity and welfare documents by foreign nationals who have entered Bharat in violation of law.

"Equally, the campaign conveniently omits the Bench’s clear affirmation that no human being on Indian soil, citizen or foreigner, can be subjected to torture, disappearance or inhuman treatment, and that every person’s dignity must be respected. To suppress this and then accuse the Court of “dehumanisation” is a serious distortion of what was actually said", the retired judges have added.

The retired judges have said that constitutionally compliant approach of the CJI has been converted into a charge of inhumanity which is unfair to the Chief Justice and damaging to the institution. If every searching judicial question on nationality, migration, documentation or border security is met with accusations of hate or prejudice, judicial independence itself will be at risk, the statement adds.

Also, the judiciary’s intervention on the issue is said to be firmly within constitutional bounds and directed towards protecting the country’s integrity while upholding basic human dignity. The judgment and observations under attack reflect this balance with insistence on legality and national security on the one hand, and unequivocal rejection of torture, disappearance and inhuman treatment on the other, they have said.

"The situation of the Rohingya in Myanmar itself is complex and cannot be brushed aside. There, too, they have long been treated as illegal migrants originating from Bangladesh, with contested or denied citizenship. This background only reinforces the need for Indian courts to proceed on clear legal categories, not slogans or political labels", the retired judges have said.

Recently, a group of more than thirty former judges, Senior Advocates and members of the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) wrote an open letter to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant expressing “deep concern” over his remarks. The signatories said the Bench made remarks questioning the legal status of Rohingya refugees, equating them with “intruders,” invoking imagery of people “digging tunnels” to enter India, and suggesting that such entrants may not be entitled to food, shelter or education. The Bench also reportedly stated that such persons should merely be spared “third-degree measures.”

According to the signatories, these remarks “dehumanise” a persecuted community and run contrary to constitutional guarantees. The Rohingya, the letter emphasises, are internationally recognised as among the “most persecuted minorities in the world,” a stateless Muslim ethnic group from Myanmar subjected to decades of discrimination, violence and what the International Court of Justice has characterised as genocide. Many flee to India seeking safety, as generations of refugees have done before them.