Congress cited Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul's forthcoming memoir to allege government interference in judicial affairs. The claims have renewed concerns over judicial independence and the appointments process.
Former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud.
New Delhi,Oct 25, 2026 13:25 IST
Citing excerpts from former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul’s yet-to-be-released memoir, the Congress on Sunday raised concerns over the independence of the judiciary under the Modi government, stressing that an institution entrusted with upholding the Constitution must remain free from the influence and pressure of those in power.
Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh cited a media report that quoted the pre-publication manuscript of Justice Kaul's memoir, Without Fear or Favour.
According to the media report, the manuscript states that former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud was "too deferential to the Government" on judicial appointments, news agency Press Trust of India reported.
In a post in Hindi on X, Ramesh said, "A book by former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul has raised serious questions regarding the independence of the judiciary during the tenure of the Modi government."
Ramesh said Justice Kaul had highlighted several concerning incidents, including alleged government interference in judicial appointments, attempts to secure government approval before Collegium meetings and the government's questioning about the caste of a judge from a minority community.
He said matters that many people had earlier been hesitant to discuss openly had now been documented by Justice Kaul in measured and deliberate language.
"Strikingly, a former Chief Justice of India (CJI) has not denied that discussions with the government take place prior to judicial appointments. When former CJI Justice Chandrachud acknowledges that the government engages with the CJI and plays a role in the appointment process, the concerns surrounding judicial independence become even more profound," Ramesh said in the post.
Ramesh also cited Justice Kaul's account that a matter was reassigned to another bench without consulting him after a bench headed by him raised the possibility of reconsidering parts of a court ruling in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
"This points to the extent of the government's day-to-day interference in the functioning of the Supreme Court," Ramesh said.
"When there is pressure to obtain government approval for judicial appointments, and when benches hearing sensitive cases are altered, one must ask -- in the interest of safeguarding democracy -- if this does not constitute pressure on the judiciary and an erosion of its independence, then what does?" he said.
"The institution tasked with upholding the Constitution must remain free from the pressures of those in power. In a democracy, the independence of the judiciary is not merely an option; it is an absolute necessity," Ramesh asserted.
The Congress's remarks centred on claims in Justice Kaul's forthcoming memoir about judicial appointments and the reassignment of a case, with Ramesh arguing that these raised concerns about pressure on the judiciary and its independence.
- Ends