‘Do you think we are not watching?’: Why CJI Surya Kant pulled up lawyer over senior advocate plea
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Friday came down heavily on a lawyer who challenged the Delhi High Court process for granting senior advocate designation, leading to sharp remarks from Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.
The lawyer had alleged that the Delhi High Court was not following the Supreme Court’s guidelines “in letter and spirit” while conferring the prestigious title of senior advocate.
“Senior advocate designation is conferred, not pursued”
During the hearing, the bench questioned why the petitioner was pursuing litigation regarding his own designation instead of focusing on his legal profession. Justice Bagchi remarked that “senior advocate designation is conferred, not pursued”, stressing that the honour is meant to recognise merit and standing at the Bar rather than something lawyers actively seek through court battles.
The bench also expressed irritation over the timing of the plea, noting that the process for senior advocate designation was currently underway in the High Court.
Supreme Court’s ‘parasite’ remark
The hearing turned heated after the bench criticised people who attack institutions and the judiciary. Chief Justice Surya Kant said there were already “parasites of society who attack the system” and questioned whether the lawyer wanted to “join hands with them”.
The bench further remarked that some individuals without meaningful work or standing in the profession turn to social media activism, RTI campaigns and media commentary to target institutions and public figures.
“Do you think we are not watching?”
The CJI also raised concerns over lawyers’ conduct on social media and questioned the genuineness of some law degrees. Referring to material posted online by advocates, he warned that the court was closely monitoring such activities.
He further said he was waiting for an appropriate case to direct a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into allegedly fake law degrees among advocates, while suggesting that the Bar Council of India had not acted on the issue.
The bench eventually permitted the lawyer to withdraw the petition. However, before doing so, the CJI made another sharp remark, saying that even if the Delhi High Court granted the lawyer senior advocate designation, the Supreme Court could set it aside considering his conduct before the court.
The courtroom exchange has since drawn attention for the Supreme Court’s unusually strong comments on legal ethics, institutional criticism and social media behaviour among advocates.