New Delhi5 minutes ago
- Copy link
Nishikant Dubey is the fourth time Lok Sabha MP from Godda in Jharkhand.
BJP MP Nishikant Dubey on Sunday targeted the former Election Commissioner after making a controversial statement against the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India. The BJP MP said, “He was not an Election Commissioner but a Muslim commissioner.”
Nishikant came in response to a post criticizing the Waqf law of former Election Commissioner Qureshi. On April 17, Qureshi wrote in a post on X, “Waqf amendment is the terrible and devilish trick of the government to grab the land of Muslims.”
Earlier, on April 19, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey made a statement, in which he said that the Supreme Court is going out of its borders. If everyone has to go to the Supreme Court for all matters, then Parliament and Assembly should be closed.
He also said, ‘Parliament makes laws of this country. Will you instruct that Parliament? Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna is responsible for the civil war in the country. The Supreme Court is responsible for inciting religious war.
Nishikant accused Qureshi
Nishikant said, ‘During your tenure, the most Bangladeshi intruders were made voters in Santhal Pargana of Jharkhand. His village Vikramashila was burnt by Bakhtiyar Khilji in 1189 and Vikramashila University gave the world the first Vice Chancellor as Atish Dipankar.
Qureshi was the Chief Election Commissioner from 30 July 2010 to 10 June 2012. Nishikant is a Lok Sabha MP from Godda in Jharkhand for 4 times.
BJP opposed Dubey’s statements
The BJP opted out of Nishikant Dubey’s statement against the Supreme Court and Chief Justice of India. National President JP Nadda wrote in the X post- BJP neither keeps any coincidence with such statements nor supports such statements. The BJP dismisses these statements outright. The party has always respected the judiciary, has gladly accepted their orders and suggestions, because as a party we believe that all the courts of the country including the Supreme Court are integral to our democracy. There is a strong foundation for the protection of the Constitution. I have directed both of them and everyone not to make such statements.
Demand for contempt proceedings from Attorney General
Advocate Anas Tanveer, who is advocating in the case of Waqf law, on Sunday, Attorney General R.K. Writing a letter to Venkataramani, seeking consent to start contempt proceedings against Dubey. Anas has written in the letter that Dubey had commented to reduce the dignity of the Supreme Court. Dubey’s comment is highly derogatory and dangerously inflammatory.
What has happened on the dispute so far…
8 April: Controversy started with Supreme Court verdict
The Supreme Court had set the limit of the authority of the Governor in the case of the Tamil Nadu Governor and the State Government on 8 April. The bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan had said, “The Governor has no veto power.” The Supreme Court also termed the government’s 10 essential bills being stopped by the Governor as illegal.
During this decision, the court also clarified the situation on the bill sent by the Governors to the President. The Supreme Court had said that the President would have to take a decision on the bill sent by the Governor within 3 months. The order was made public on 11 April. Read full news …
17 April: Dhankhar said- courts cannot order the President
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar was addressing a group of Rajya Sabha intern on 17 April. During this time, he objected to the advice of the Supreme Court, in which the President and the governors had set a deadline for approving the bills.
Dhankhar had said- “The courts cannot order the President. The special rights under Article 142 of the Constitution have become 24×7 available nuclear missile against democratic powers. Judges are acting as a super parliamentary.” Read full news …
April 18: Sibal said- President nominal head in India
Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal said that when the executive does not work, the judiciary will have to intervene. The President is the head of the nominal head in India. The President-Governor has to work on the advice of governments. I am surprised to hear the Vice President, I am also sad. They should not talk to any party.
Referring to a decision of the Supreme Court on 24 June 1975, Sibal said- ‘People will remember when the decision on Indira Gandhi’s election came, only one judge, Justice Krishna Iyer ruled. At that time Indira had to lose Sansadi. Then Dhankhar ji approved this. But now the decision of the two -judge bench against the government is being questioned. Read full news …