Remarks on Judiciary: Lawyer writes to AG seeking Contempt Proceedings Against Sanjeev Sanyal
AG Consent Sought to Initiate Contempt Proceedings Against Government Advisor Over Remarks on Judiciary
Advocate Shashi Ranjan Kumar Singh has formally requested the Attorney General of India (AGI) R. Venkataramani to allow criminal contempt proceedings against Sanjeev Sanyal, Member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC-PM), over his recent remarks on the judiciary.
Under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the lawyer alleges that Sanyal’s comments scandalize the Supreme Court and undermine public confidence in India’s judicial system. While fair criticism of judgments is constitutionally protected under Article 19(1)(a), the lawyer argues that statements which bring the judiciary into disrepute are not.
Citing widely reported news articles, Advocate Singh emphasized that Sanyal’s position as a government advisor gives his statements “significant influence,” making the alleged contempt particularly serious. He includes references to Sanyal’s remarks calling the judicial system a hurdle to national development, which, according to Singh, exceed the limits of permissible criticism.
In a related news, Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa has written a strongly worded letter to Sanjeev Sanyal, Member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC-PM), taking exception to his recent public remarks describing the judiciary as the “biggest hurdle” in India’s aspiration to become Viksit Bharat.
Pahwa said such sweeping criticism risks undermining the very institution that is “the backbone of our Constitutional framework.” While acknowledging the importance of reforms and efficiency, he underlined that judicial independence and constitutional oversight cannot be sacrificed for speed alone.
In the detailed letter dated September 23, 2025, Pahwa wrote, “The judiciary does not obstruct progress, it ensures development within the framework of Constitutional values, liberty and fairness. To call it the biggest hurdle is extremely unfortunate.”
He added that delays in justice are often the result of systemic shortages of judges and inadequate infrastructure, failures that require executive support, not judicial blame. “A nation’s progress cannot be measured merely by the speed of contracts or clearances; it must be judged by whether liberty, justice and equality are preserved along the way,” he said.
Notably, earlier, in May, Sanjeev Sanyal had also advocated for reforms in the judiciary and the collegium system. He had stated “We will have to change the justice system. Think about this 'tareekh pe tareekh' system. What is this? We say this is from the colonial time. For seventy-five years we have the same system… The High Courts and the Supreme Court take leave in summer and then take leave again in Dussehra. What is this system? They work for a few hours. All these old systems will have to be changed, and modernise it. The government can contribute to this to some extent. But in the end, the justice system will have to do it on its own”.
Sanyal had criticized the existing system, including the practice of judges taking extended summer and Dussehra vacations, which he deemed inefficient. He had highlighted the need for change, suggesting that outdated practices should be replaced with more efficient and contemporary approaches.
Sanyal had also called for a revamp of the collegium system, which currently enables apex court judges to appoint and transfer judges in the High Courts and the Supreme Court. He had expressed concerns about the lack of merit-based appointments, suggesting that the current system perpetuates nepotism and favoritism. Drawing parallels with his own role as an advisor to the Prime Minister, Sanyal had emphasized the importance of meritocracy in judicial appointments to ensure fairness and competence.
Letter Date: September 25, 2025