'Should resign immediately': Opposition slams VP Dhankhar's comments on SC

NEW DELHI: Opposition leaders have strongly criticised Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar’s recent comments targeting the Supreme Court, accusing him of undermining the judiciary and violating constitutional norms. Dhankhar had questioned the Supreme Court’s authority under Article 142 and criticised its verdict setting timelines for presidential assent to bills, sparking sharp reactions from opposition leaders.
"Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against Democratic forces available to judiciary 24x7. We cannot have a situation where you direct the President of India and on what basis? The only right you have under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution under Article 145(3). There it has to be five judges when Article 145(3) was there, the number of judges in the Supreme Court was eight, 5 out of 8, now 5 out of 30 odd more," Dhankhar had said.

Senior Congress leader Randeep Singh Surjewala expressed his deep disagreement with the Vice President's position, despite acknowledging Dhankhar's experience and intellect. He said the Supreme Court’s verdict was “timely, courageous and correct,” and clarified that even high offices such as the President or Governors are not immune to constitutional checks.
“In our democracy, only the Constitution of India is supreme,” Surjewala said, adding, “Judicial independence is indeed a ‘nuclear missile’—to strike down injustice, arbitrariness and misuse of power.” He argued that if the President or Governors were allowed unchecked authority, it would render elected legislatures powerless. “The Constitution would never confer such unbridled powers,” he warned.

Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee launched a scathing attack, accusing the Vice President of repeatedly making derogatory remarks about the judiciary. “This is not expected from someone holding a constitutional position,” he said.
Banerjee demanded Dhankhar’s resignation, stating, “He does not deserve to remain in the post of Vice President of India. He cannot attack one of the pillars of our democracy.” His remarks came in response to Dhankhar calling Article 142 a “nuclear missile against democratic forces,” while questioning the Supreme Court’s power to direct the President.

Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Manoj Kumar Jha urged for a more balanced and sensitive approach among all institutions of democracy. "Whether it is the executive, legislature, judiciary, or media, there has to be a fine balance," he said.
Jha stressed the need for constructive engagement instead of conflict. “We are in an era of politics where we need to think with sensitivity,” he said, cautioning against confrontations that could damage institutional integrity.

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader and Rajya Sabha MP Tiruchi Siva slammed Dhankhar’s comments as “unethical,” asserting that they violate the principle of separation of powers.
“When all three branches act within their own spheres, we must remember that the Constitution is supreme,” Siva said. He backed the Supreme Court’s ruling, which set timelines for presidential assent, as a step towards protecting legislative authority from indefinite delays. “No constitutional authority can override bills passed by elected legislatures,” he added.

Rajya Sabha MP and senior advocate Kapil Sibal also criticised comments on the judiciary, expressing disappointment and questioning his understanding of constitutional principles. Sibal said he was “saddened and surprised” by Dhankhar’s remarks, particularly the comparison of Article 142 to a “nuclear missile.”
He defended the judiciary as one of the most trusted institutions and accused the government of selectively accepting court rulings based on political convenience. Sibal clarified that Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to ensure complete justice and stressed that the President is a titular head who acts solely on the advice of the Cabinet. He warned against distorting this framework and criticised the Vice President for questioning the court’s composition in key verdicts.
Responding to Union ministers who echoed Dhankhar’s concerns, Sibal said the bench size is determined by the Court itself and must be respected. He also raised concerns over attempts to undermine the judiciary’s role.