"Maybe met me a couple of time": Ex-SC judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul refutes report of mentoring CJP’s Saurav Das

"I was not mentoring him, but once or twice he met me, I told him that, you know, I will always tell you to taper down a little in your language," he said.

Amid the controversy surrounding Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) activists over their protest at Jantar Mantar, former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul has clarified that he was not mentoring party leader Saurav Das, recalling that he had met him as a journalist only a couple of times and advised him to "taper down a little" in his language, which he said often differs across generations. In an interview with ANI, Justice Kaul said a photograph of him with Das, taken at a Diwali gathering about a year ago, was being used to suggest that he had a particular ideology.

"So, it was one year ago. He was not even in the news then," Justice Kaul said, explaining how he came to meet Das. "He was a journalist, maybe met me a couple of times. He was insistent that I must, at Diwali time, come. I was going somewhere else. I said, 'Okay, I'll drop in for ten minutes.' I told my wife, 'Have a cup of coffee, I'll drop in for ten minutes, and then we'll go.' That's all that happened," he said.

When asked whether he had mentored Das at any point, Justice Kaul denied doing so, while acknowledging that he had advised him on his choice of words. "I was not mentoring him, but once or twice he met me, I told him that, I will always tell you to taper down a little in your language," he said.

Justice Kaul said differences in language across generations could sometimes be a source of discomfort, particularly for people accustomed to more civil forms of conversation. "That's my view, because we belong to a generation where talking is in far more civil language when it happens. That's maybe not the Gen Z's language sometime," he said.

Asked whether such language could eventually make its way into courtrooms and whether this was a matter of concern, Justice Kaul said people needed to exercise restraint. "I think people need to draw a couple of steps back on the language, at least for people of our generations. We are not used to that language, so, it hurts at times," he said.

When asked whether he would advise the CJP youngsters to tone down their aggression or whether such aggression was necessary to bring about reform, Justice Kaul declined to offer any specific advice. "I wouldn't like to advise them in any way. Tomorrow, you'll have a news that I am advising them!" he said with a laugh.

"See, this is what I'm saying—how diaspora starts," he added. Meanwhile, Justice Kaul also spoke about his experience of New Delhi's social and legal circles, describing the capital as "transactional in character", while noting that he had maintained a good circle of friends in the city. He also said Chennai had become a second home to him since he moved away from Delhi.

"Delhi is very transactional in character...In Delhi, I've had a circle of friends, a good circle of friends. In the profession also, amongst the judges, there is still a reasonable interaction amongst them. In the Supreme Court, one of the challenges that comes up is that people have come from different backgrounds, different states, so interaction is a little different," he said. The former judge also weighed in on the debate over whether the Supreme Court should have a role in the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), saying the question of having a neutral third party in the selection process needed to be examined.

Justice Kaul said the court would analyse whether an independent member should be part of the appointment mechanism, noting that the government could change the law after a judicial ruling. "So, that that's not a wrong debate. That's a debate which has to be seen, whether the court will analyse it, whether there has to be a neutral third party. Because the court ruled, but then they brought in a law now. Government can change the law. Whether some other method should be employed," he said.

Justice Kaul's remarks come amid scrutiny of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) following a protest at Jantar Mantar on October 13, which led to the detention of party activists. The controversy has continued as Delhi Police seeks to question CJP leaders in connection with the matter, while the activists have undertaken before the court not to disturb public tranquillity and to ensure that any future protests remain within the constitutional framework. CJP activists Ashutosh Ranka, Saurav Das and Ajinkya Shinde appeared before the Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) court on Friday for verification of their sureties. According to the activists, the court scheduled their next hearing for the third week of November.

The development came after the three CJP activists did not appear before the Delhi Police Crime Branch on October 22, despite being summoned to join the investigation at noon. Ranka said they had informed the police that they could not attend on the scheduled date and were awaiting fresh dates for questioning.

The Crime Branch had summoned the three activists to its Rajouri Garden office. Earlier, the SEM court ordered the release of Das and Ranka from judicial custody after accepting their personal and surety bonds and taking written undertakings from them to maintain peace and abide by the law. SEM Ritu Raj directed the two leaders to furnish personal and surety bonds of Rs 50,000 each until the conclusion of the enquiry. The court also directed them to appear on every hearing date and comply with the conditions specified in their bonds and undertakings.

In their written undertakings, Das and Ranka promised not to breach peace or disturb public tranquillity. They also undertook not to call for protests at Jantar Mantar until the site is denotified in accordance with the law, and said any future protests would be conducted within the constitutional framework. The activists were detained in connection with an October 13 protest at Jantar Mantar, which had been denotified as a designated protest site. Police had alleged that they entered the area through private premises and violated conditions relating to maintaining peace.

The SEM court has clarified that the enquiry will continue in accordance with the law. (ANI)