Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has released a formal statement to rectify the perceived meaning of oral observations made during a recent court proceeding.

印度首席大法官 Surya Kant 已發表正式聲明，以糾正近期法庭程序中口頭評論之被誤解之意。

The controversy originated during a hearing presided over by a bench comprising CJI Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The court was reviewing a petition filed by advocate Sanjay Dubey concerning the implementation of guidelines for senior advocate designation. During the proceedings, the bench characterized the petition as frivolous and expressed disapproval of the petitioner's conduct, specifically citing inappropriate language utilized on social media. The court asserted that senior designation is a conferred distinction rather than a right to be pursued via litigation.

此次爭議源於一場由首席大法官 Kant 與法官 Joymalya Bagchi 主持的聆訊。法院當時正在審理由律師 Sanjay Dubey 提交關於高級律師委任指南執行情況的請願書。在程序中，法官將該請願定性為輕率且毫無根據，並對請願人的行為表示不滿，特別是引用其在社群媒體上使用的不當語言。法院主張，高級律師之稱號是一種授予的榮譽，而非可透過訴訟追求的權利。

In the course of these deliberations, the CJI utilized metaphors such as 'cockroaches' and 'parasites' to describe individuals who infiltrate professional spheres—including the legal Bar, traditional media, and social media—through the utilization of fraudulent academic credentials. He further suggested that certain unemployed individuals transition into roles as RTI activists or media personnel to initiate attacks on institutional frameworks. The CJI specifically advocated for Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) intervention to address the proliferation of lawyers possessing dubious degrees, noting a perceived lack of volition among bar council bodies due to electoral considerations.

在討論過程中，首席大法官使用「蟑螂」與「寄生蟲」等隱喻，來形容那些利用偽造學歷滲入專業領域（包括法律界、傳統媒體及社群媒體）的人。他進一步暗示，某些失業人士轉型為資訊權利（RTI）活動人士或媒體人員，以對體制框架發起攻擊。首席大法官特別主張由中央調查局（CBI）介入，以解決持有可疑學位律師激增的問題，並指出律師協會因選舉考量而缺乏行動意願。

Following the dissemination of these remarks, NCP leader Rohit Pawar characterized the language as unacceptable, positing that it reflected an intolerance toward systemic criticism and marginalized a generation facing economic instability. In response to the subsequent public discourse, CJI Kant issued a clarification stating that a segment of the media had misconstrued his remarks. He emphasized that his criticism was exclusively directed at those employing bogus degrees and explicitly dissociated his comments from the general youth population, whom he described as the foundational pillars of a developed India.

在這些言論傳播後，NCP 領袖 Rohit Pawar 稱這些措辭不可接受，認為這反映了對系統性批評的不耐容忍，並邊緣化了面臨經濟不穩定的年輕一代。針對隨後的公眾討論，首席大法官 Kant 發表澄清，指出部分媒體誤解了他的言論。他強調，其批評僅針對使用偽造學位之人，並明確將其言論與一般青年群體區分開來，將青年描述為發展中印度的基石。

The petitioner subsequently withdrew the plea following an apology to the court, while the CJI maintains that his remarks were targeted at professional fraud rather than the national youth.

請願人在向法院道歉後隨即撤回請願，而首席大法官則堅持其言論是針對專業欺詐而非全國青年。