---
title: "Kerala Congress’s deleted CJI post faces reported contempt case; party cites unauthorised message"
url: https://indianvoter.com/kerala-congress-cji-post-reported-contempt-case-party-apology-2026/
type: post
date: 2026-11-02
modified: 2026-11-02
markdown_url: https://indianvoter.com/kerala-congress-cji-post-reported-contempt-case-party-apology-2026.md
author: "aamersiddiqui"
---

# Kerala Congress’s deleted CJI post faces reported contempt case; party cites unauthorised message

**Reported November 2, 2026**

A deleted Kerala Congress post targeting Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has become the subject of a reported Supreme Court contempt case, after the party apologised and said its leadership had not authorised the message. The reported registration marks a procedural development; it does not establish contempt or settle responsibility for the post.

## What has been reported about the case

Outlook reported on October 31, citing Hindustan Times, that the registry combined letters from lawyers Vineet Jindal and Sreejesh SR into a suo motu petition seeking contempt action against the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee. Its account described November 6 as a tentative listing date. That is a reported listing, rather than confirmation that a hearing has taken place or that an order has been made.

The dispute concerns an October 12 message on the party’s official X account demanding the Chief Justice’s resignation and suggesting a replacement would be found. The message was subsequently removed. The Supreme Court’s own judges page confirms Surya Kant’s position as Chief Justice; the portrait accompanying this report dates from 2019.

## Congress’s apology and explanation

The Indian Express reported on October 28 that the KPCC had offered an unconditional apology. President Sunny Joseph said the message had appeared without the leadership’s prior knowledge or approval. The party rejected its language and said the person responsible had been removed from the relevant role.

The party’s response also reaffirmed respect for judicial independence and the Chief Justice’s office. It said account access, operator authority and approval arrangements would be reviewed. These are the organisation’s explanations and commitments, not findings by a court about who authorised the communication.

## The next development to watch

The meaningful next record would be a court order or an updated official listing. Neither a complaint seeking action nor an apology supplies the eventual judicial outcome. Reporting should keep the deleted statement, the party’s response and any later adjudication separate, so readers can see what each document actually establishes.

The accountability question also extends to how an official political account is managed. A promise to improve approvals can be assessed against subsequent arrangements, but should not be described as a completed reform without evidence. This is an explanatory distinction, rather than a new allegation about the party’s operations.

## Frequently asked questions

### Has the court found the KPCC guilty of contempt?

No such finding is established by the reports cited here. Registration of a case and a final decision are different stages.

### What is the party’s position?

The KPCC apologised, disowned the wording and said its leadership had not authorised it.

### Is November 6 a confirmed hearing outcome?

No. The date was reported as tentative. An official listing or order would be needed to establish the subsequent procedural position.

## Sources and report context

This report draws on [Outlook’s October 31 case-registration account](https://www.outlookindia.com/national/sc-takes-suo-motu-cognisance-over-kerala-congress-post-targeting-cji-surya-kant), [The Indian Express’s October 28 report of the KPCC response](https://indianexpress.com/article/india/kerala-congress-apology-cji-surya-kant-post-10939541/) and the [Supreme Court’s official judges page](https://www.sci.gov.in/chief-justice-judges/). No case number, judicial finding or final hearing date is asserted. Follow our [National politics desk](https://indianvoter.com/category/political-news/national/) for related reporting. The image is a dated archive portrait, not a photograph of these proceedings.

## Image source

Justice Surya Kant in a Supreme Court of India portrait dated 14 June 2019, before he became Chief Justice of India. Archive portrait identifies the subject of the disputed post; not a photograph of 2026 proceedings. Photo: Supreme Court of India / [Original file page](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Justice_Surya_Kant.jpg) · [GODL-India](https://data.gov.in/sites/default/files/Gazette_Notification_OGDL.pdf). Original Commons file downloaded unchanged; WordPress may resize, crop or recompress it for display. No endorsement implied.