CJI Surya Kant slams SC Registry: “They think they are permanent, we are in transit”*

---

*1. What Triggered It*
A petition challenging the *UP Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities Act, 1986* came before CJI Surya Kant’s 3-judge bench.

*Problem*: A similar petition was _already dismissed_ on 12.12.2022 by a 3-judge bench headed by then-CJI DY Chandrachud. Yet the Registry listed it again before a different bench.

*2. CJI’s Remarks – 26.02.2026*

> _"I will order a deep probe. There are officials in the Registry who have been here since last 20-30 years. They think we are all here in transit and they are permanent. Therefore, things must happen the way they want."_[judges]

> _"If I don’t correct this before I demit office, I would be failing in my duties."_

> _"I was stunned... When a bench has expressed an opinion, how is that case travelling to another bench?"_

*His charge*: Registry officials working “as per their whims” despite reforms, bypassing judicial orders.

*3. The Specific Case*
*Petitioners*: Siraj Ahmad Khan + Irfan Solanki
*Issue*: UP Gangsters Act vs Section 111 BNS, 2023 – repugnancy
*What happened*: Earlier 3-judge bench declined Article 32 petition in Dec 2022. Registry still listed fresh similar plea before CJI’s bench. State of UP flagged it.

CJI refused to let petitioner withdraw. Kept matter on board “so that the matter can be taken to a logical end.”

*4. Context: CJI Surya Kant*
- *Sworn in*: 2026, CJI till Feb 2027
- *Background*: Haryana, “first class first” LLM Kurukshetra 2011, ex-CJ Himachal HC
- *Notable cases*: Article 370, sedition law abeyance, Bihar SIR voter rolls, women quota in bar associations
- *Stance*: “I have never been pressured by social media trolls… judges decide cases based on facts and law”

*5. Bigger Issue*
Registry = SC’s administrative arm. Controls listing, tagging, circulation. CJI alleging *“bench shopping” enabled by registry* – dismissed matters getting relisted before favourable benches. Undermines judicial discipline.

He’s vowed
[04/05, 16:59] Meta AI: *LiveLaw | 26.02.2026*
*CJI Surya Kant slams SC Registry: “They think they are permanent, we are in transit”*

---

*1. What Triggered It*
A petition challenging the *UP Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities Act, 1986* came before CJI Surya Kant’s 3-judge bench.

*Problem*: A similar petition was _already dismissed_ on 12.12.2022 by a 3-judge bench headed by then-CJI DY Chandrachud. Yet the Registry listed it again before a different bench.

*2. CJI’s Remarks – 26.02.2026*

> _"I will order a deep probe. There are officials in the Registry who have been here since last 20-30 years. They think we are all here in transit and they are permanent. Therefore, things must happen the way they want."_[judges]

> _"If I don’t correct this before I demit office, I would be failing in my duties."_

> _"I was stunned... When a bench has expressed an opinion, how is that case travelling to another bench?"_

*His charge*: Registry officials working “as per their whims” despite reforms, bypassing judicial orders.

*3. The Specific Case*
*Petitioners*: Siraj Ahmad Khan + Irfan Solanki
*Issue*: UP Gangsters Act vs Section 111 BNS, 2023 – repugnancy
*What happened*: Earlier 3-judge bench declined Article 32 petition in Dec 2022. Registry still listed fresh similar plea before CJI’s bench. State of UP flagged it.

CJI refused to let petitioner withdraw. Kept matter on board “so that the matter can be taken to a logical end.”

*4. Context: CJI Surya Kant*
- *Sworn in*: 2026, CJI till Feb 2027
- *Background*: Haryana, “first class first” LLM Kurukshetra 2011, ex-CJ Himachal HC
- *Notable cases*: Article 370, sedition law abeyance, Bihar SIR voter rolls, women quota in bar associations
- *Stance*: “I have never been pressured by social media trolls… judges decide cases based on facts and law”

*5. Bigger Issue*
Registry = SC’s administrative arm. Controls listing, tagging, circulation. CJI alleging *“bench shopping” enabled by registry* – dismissed matters getting relisted before favourable benches. Undermines judicial discipline.

He’s vowed *“deeper probe” + reforms before Feb 2027 retirement*.

---

*Bottom Line*: CJI Surya Kant caught the SC Registry relisting a case his predecessor already killed. Called it “shocking bungling” and went after 20-30 year veteran officials who “think they are permanent”. Promised a deep probe and registry reforms. Same day he also issued contempt notices to NCERT over “Corruption in judiciary” chapter.

Pattern: Both CJI Surya Kant & Justice Victoria Gowri on 30.04.2026 stressed *“evidentiary discipline”* and *procedure over zeal*. Top to bottom, courts signaling they won’t tolerate shortcuts.
[04/05, 16:59] sekarreporter1: In a strongly worded reprimand, the Chief Justice of India on Monday expressed serious displeasure over the functioning of its Registry, directing the Registrar (Judicial) to conduct a fact-finding enquiry into an apparent lapse in carrying out a judicial order.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took exception to the Registry's failure to issue notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED), despite a specific direction passed by the Court.

During the proceedings, the Bench observed that its earlier order had clearly directed issuance of notice to the ED. However, the office report prepared by the Registry stated that no such direction had been issued. This discrepancy prompted sharp remarks from the Court.

“Very nasty Registry, they think they are super Chief Justice of India,” the CJI remarked, indicating its dissatisfaction with what appeared to be a serious administrative lapse.

The Court has now asked the Registrar (Judicial) to conduct a fact-finding enquiry and submit an explanation as to how the judicial direction was not reflected in the Registry's records and why notice was not issued to the ED.

Earlier also, the CJI had expressed unhappiness with the Registry's functioning, saying that its functioning required a "deeper probe", after noting that similar matters were listed before different