Last Updated: September 22, 2026

Dainik Savera Times Logo

  • Commotion in Supreme Court: Man throws papers, abuses CJ during hearing

    July 10, 2026

    Commotion in Supreme Court: Man throws papers, abuses CJ during hearing

    A lawyer created a ruckus during a hearing at the Supreme Court on Friday. He hurled abuses and threw a file. The Chief Justice was not present in the courtroom at the time.

    The incident occurred before a bench comprising Justice KV Viswanathan and Justice Alok Aradhe. Following the commotion, security personnel removed the lawyer from the premises on the court’s orders.

    A hush fell over the courtroom when the lawyer—who was also the petitioner—began behaving in an unruly manner. The Delhi Police have taken the lawyer away for questioning.

    In the Supreme Court, Petitioner-in-person addressed Justices KV Viswanathan and Alok Aradhe as “Mr. Judicial Servant” and demanded they order an FIR against Lucknow ACP Vikas Nagar and Duplex Technology Services over alleged cybercrime.

    Judges’ remarks: Sympathy for the lawyer; understand what happens 

    The lawyer who caused the disturbance was identified as Prabal Pratap. He had approached the Supreme Court after his writ petition was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court. The petition challenged a court order that had treated his plea as a private complaint rather than directing a police investigation.

    When the hearing began in the Supreme Court, the judge asked the petitioner if he would be arguing the case himself. In response, Prabal said, “Your Honour, I order you to direct the registration of an FIR against the ACP of Lucknow.” Expressing astonishment, Justice KV Viswanathan asked, “Are you issuing an order to me?” The petitioner replied, “That is all from my side. Everything is on record.” He then threw the case file into the air and began using abusive language.

    After the commotion, Justice KV Viswanathan remarked, “He is very distressed; this is all a result of his frustration. We have nothing but sympathy for him. We do not wish to take any action against him. As for the merits of the case, we found no substantial grounds to interfere with the impugned order.”

    There is more news...