Gaurav bhatia on cji’s statement: Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.K. R. Gawai recently said during an event held at Mauritius that the Indian judicial system is not operated by the rule of bulldozers, but from the rule of law.

BJP spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia supported this statement saying that India’s democracy is strong and the judiciary has strengthened further in the last 11 years with the government’s cooperation. Apart from this, he also targeted Rahul Gandhi.

Gaurav Bhatia said this

Gaurav Bhatia said, ‘India’s judiciary has strengthened with foresight with the cooperation of the government in the last 11 years. He said that India runs under the Constitution and Law. The faith of the Chief Justice is in the constitution and the faith of Indian citizens is also in the constitution. It is also true that India is a country where democracy is strong. He dismissed Rahul Gandhi’s statement that it was said that India’s democracy is over, and said that it is beyond the truth.

Bhatia further said that India will always run under the Constitution and Law. The government also has a commitment to the Constitution. The judicial system and our Chief Justice are also respected. Their faith is in the constitution and the faith of citizens is also in the Constitution.

Not a bulldozer, India will run with constitution

CJI B. R. Gawai had earlier said in the ‘Rule of Law Memorial Lecture’ in Mauritius that without hearing and legal process, the house of someone from bulldozers is against the rules of law. He clarified, “India runs not from the rule of bulldozers, but from the rule of law.”

The Chief Justice, citing Mahatma Gandhi, said that before taking any decision, it should be thought that what will be the effect on the poorest and last person of the society. Giving the example of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, he said that the Constitution has made rules and procedures in such a way that there is no misuse of power and every human should get justice. CJI B. R. Gawai said that the Supreme Court of India has always been strengthening the “rule of law” and he also mentioned many historical decisions for this.

On an important question related to Muslim will, the Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Central Government. In the petition, the petition has also demanded to bring Muslims under sections 58 (1) and 57 of the Indian Supplies Act. The petitioner has opposed the system of Muslim personal law, under which a person can do only one third of the property. Approval of legal heirs is necessary for the will of the rest of the property.

Muslim Personal Law violates the fundamental right of religious freedom: Petition

The petition of Kerala, who is advocating in Abu Dhabi, stated that the Holy Quran allows Muslims for a will, but limits the Muslim personal law applicable in India. This provision of personal law is not according to the Quran. In such a situation, it violates the fundamental right to religious freedom found under Article 25 of the Constitution. It also violates Article 14, 15 (right to equality), 21 (right to life) and 300A (right to property).

Father cannot give equal property to sons to daughters: petition

The petitioner has said that in modern times boys and girls are being seen with equality, but if a Muslim father wants to give equal property to his sons and daughters, he cannot do so. Muslim personal law prevents him from doing so. At present, one -third of the property has the right to the will. Supreme Court Justice P.S. Narasimha and A. S. Chandurkar’s bench accepted the petition for hearing after a short debate. The court said that it will hear this petition with a petition already pending on this subject.

Also read: Will you be the Vice Presidential candidate from the opposition? DMK’s Tiruchi Shiva gave this answer

On behalf of the Central Government, it has made it clear in the House that it is not removing socialism and secularism from the Preamble of the Constitution, on which the reaction of Bahujan Samaj Party chief Mayawati has come. He has welcomed this and said that such unfair changes in the constitution are wrong, it is news of relief for the people.

BSP supremo Mayawati wrote on X- The statement of the law minister of the country in Parliament yesterday said that the government has no intention nor any such idea of removing the word ‘Secularism’ (secularism) etc.

BSP supremo Mayawati reacted
Especially our party B.S.P. There is news of relief for all those people all over the country and all over the world, and good assurance which is completely against any unfair change or tampering of such kind of unfair change or tampering in the constitution of Param Pujya Baba Saheb Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar and was also concerned about such wrong demand.

Anyway, it is well known that our India is the largest population of the world of various religions like Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist and Parsi etc. and the characteristic of unity in diversity through the Constitution is its unmatched identity.

Babasaheb Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar created the constitution only for giving equal respect to people of all religions and thinking of equal respect and thinking of equal social system etc.

The Central Government has clarified its position according to the sacred intention of the Constitution regarding the latest controversy over the Constitution, this is a good thing and the government will remain on its stand without cares and worrying, there is also the desire and hope of such a country.

Explain that the Law Minister has made it clear in the House that the word socialism and secularism are not being removed from the Preamble of the Constitution, the government is not doing anything like this.

Cji br gavai on constitution: Chief Justice BR Gawai said on Wednesday (25 June 2025) that the Constitution of India is supreme and all three organs of democracy work under the Constitution. He said that some people say that Parliament is supreme, but in his opinion the Constitution is paramount. Justice Gawai, who took oath as the 52nd Chief Justice last month, was speaking at his reception in Amravati, his hometown in Amravati, East Maharashtra.

He said that there is always a discussion on which part of democracy is supreme – executive, legislature or judiciary. He said, “Although many people say and believe that Parliament is supreme, but according to me the Constitution of India is supreme. All three organs of democracy work under the Constitution. ”

‘Parliament has the power to amend’- CJI BI Gawai

Referring to the decision passed by the Supreme Court on the basis of the principle of ‘original structure’, Chief Justice Gavai said that Parliament has the power to amend, but it cannot change the original structure of the Constitution. He said that just by passing the order against the government, no judge becomes independent. He said, “The judge should always remember that it is our duty and we are the patron of the rights and constitutional values ​​and principles of the citizens. We do not only have power, but we have also been put on duty.

What will people say? In what relation did CJI say this

The Chief Justice said that no judge should be directed by what people will say about their decision or what they will feel. He said, “We have to think independently. What people will say, it cannot be a part of our decision making process. During his address, the Chief Justice cited some of his decisions. Referring to his decision against ‘bulldozer justice’, he said that the right to shelter is supreme.

CJI Br gavai in prayagraj: Chief Justice of India Justice BR Gavai credited the constitution for the solidarity of the country on Saturday (May 30, 2025). He said that whenever there has been a crisis on the country, he faced him with strength and solidarity and the credit should be given to the Constitution.

CJI BR Gavai said this in the inaugural program of newly constructed advocate Chamber Bhavan and multi -level parking in the Allahabad High Court at a cost of Rs 680 crore. CJI Gavai, the chief guest of the program, said, “The fundamental duty of the judiciary is to reach the last citizen of the country who needs justice and the same duty of the legislature and the executive.”

India’s Chief Justice BR Gavai said, “Meghwal ji (Minister of Law and Justice) said that (CM) Yogi ji is the most powerful and hardworking CM of this country. I would like to say that Allahabad is the land of powerful people.”

Legislature, executive and judiciary contributed to bring social equality- CJI

The Chief Justice said, “Whenever there was a crisis, India remained united and strong. The credit should be given to the Constitution. In the 75 -year journey of the Indian Constitution, the legislature, executive and judiciary have made a big contribution in bringing social and economic equality. Many such laws were brought in which land was given to landless persons by taking land from land.”

He said, “These laws were also challenged from time to time. Before 1973, the Supreme Court had the idea that there will be a situation of conflict between the Directive Principles (Directive Principal) and the fundamental rights, then the fundamental right will be up. Does not have the right. “

Both Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles Spirit of Constitution- CJI

The Chief Justice said, “A bench of 13 judges of 1973 also said that both Fundamental Rights and Policy Principles are the souls of the Constitution. Both of them are two wheels of the golden chariot of the Constitution, out of which the whole chariot will stop if one wheel stops.”

He said, “I have always said that bar and bench are two aspects of a coin. Until the bar and bench work together, the chariot of justice cannot be pushed forward. Today the Allahabad High Court has given a good ideal for the whole country, in which judges vacated 12 bungalows and took care of the convenience of their lawyer brothers.”

State and central government always ready to solve the problem of advocate- CM Yogi

Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, the distinguished guest of the program, said, “The state and central government is constantly trying to overcome the problems of the advocates. A proposal has been approved to build campus in seven districts in this direction and Rs 1,700 crore has been released for this.”

The Chief Minister said, “The government has increased the amount of advocate fund from Rs 1.5 lakh to Rs five lakh and the age limit of its eligible advocates has also been increased from 60 years to 70 years. For this, a fund of Rs 500 crore has also been given.”

CM Yogi underlined the role of High Court in organizing Mahakumbh

Underlining the role of the High Court in organizing the Prayagraj Mahakumbh, Yogi Adityanath said, “The event of Prayagraj Mahakumbh could be so successful because the Allahabad High Court did not stay any project.”

Justice Suryakanth of the Supreme Court, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice JK Maheshwari, Justice Pankaj Mithil, Justice Manoj Mishra, Union Law and Justice Minister Arjunram Meghwal, Allahabad High Court Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Chief Justice of Delhi High Court DK Upadhyay were also present at the inauguration ceremony.

Multiple parking made in Allahabad High Court

Multilavel parking constructed in the Allahabad High Court has parking capacity of 3,835 vehicles as well as 2,366 chambers. Five floors including underground floors and surface of this 14 -storey building are reserved for parking. At the same time, six floors are dedicated to the advocates’ chamber. 26 lifts, 28 escalators and four travelers have been built in this building.

The cases of judges have been in discussion for some time. Sometimes Justice Yashwant Verma makes the headlines for the bundle of notes found in the house, sometimes a criminal openly threatens a judge. In such a situation, if a criminal case has come up against a judge, then action is also taken against him, then that judge is from the High Court or of the Supreme Court. According to the constitution against the judges, a process is run to remove them. But how all this happens, who has the right to do so. Let’s know about this.

Can not remove arbitrary

The judiciary is an essential institution of democracy of the country, in such a situation, provisions have been given clearly in the Constitution regarding its fair and independent operations. Whether the judges whether of the Supreme Court or the High Court, their tenure cannot be lifetime, but they have not been removed from the post arbitrarily. The process of removing a judge from the post is called IMPEachment Process, which is a very complex process.

What is the provision to remove judges in the constitution

Article 124 (4) of the Constitution talks about removing the judges of the Supreme Court. According to the constitution, the judge can be removed for only two reasons, one is on the basis of disqualification, in which a judge is involved in corruption or is misusing his position or makes a serious moral mistake. At the same time, the second reason is the disability, in which the judge is not able to work physically or mentally.

What is the removal process

The process of removing judges consists of several steps after another, which involves the proposal in Parliament. If a judge is to be removed, then an impeachment motion is passed in Parliament. To present this proposal in the Lok Sabha, the signature of 100 MPs and at least 50 MPs is required to present it in Rajya Sabha. After this, an inquiry committee is formed. After getting the proposal, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of Rajya Sabha constitute a three -member committee. It consists of senior judges of the Supreme Court, a Chief Justice of the High Court and a reputed jurist.

Last seal of president

This committee investigates and then submitting the report and suggests whether the judges are guilty or not. After this, there is a process of voting in Parliament. If the committee found that the judge is guilty, then this proposal has to be passed in both houses of Parliament. It should be passed by a special majority. That is, more than 50% of the Parliament and at least two -thirds of the members present will have to vote in its favor. If it passes through Parliament, then it is sent to the President. The judge can be removed after the President’s approval.

Also read: Are Delhi’s fierce heat upset? You will not be able to stand in these countries for two minutes