BJP leader Nishikant Dubey launched a broadside against the Supreme Court on Saturday, saying Parliament and state assemblies should be closed down if the top court has to make the laws.
He made the comments after the Centre’s assurance to the court that it would not be implementing some of the contentious provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act till the next day of hearing after the court raised questions over them.
The BJP leader is known to be a more vocal member of the Lok Sabha. His political journey began with the Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). He has been representing the Godda Lok Sabha constituency in Jharkhand since 2009.
Dubey, born in Bihar’s Bhagalpur, holds a Ph.D. in Management and an MBA, and he previously served as a director at Essar Group before venturing into politics.
Nishikant Dubey Recent Controversy
An FIR was filed against Nishikant Dubey, his wife Anamika Gautam, their two sons, and others in March last year for allegedly usurping a private medical college and hospital in Deoghar, Jharkhand, through fraudulent means.
In the complaint, Dubey was accused of misappropriating documents and using the Baba Baidyanath Medical Trust to acquire the institution via a manipulated auction process.
The complainant said he had borrowed Rs 93 crore for the medical college and hospital, but the bank designated the loan as a non-performing asset due to a lack of approval from the Medical Council of India. Dubey allegedly took Rs 20 lakh from Sharma, promising to find a partner to resolve the financial crisis, but instead facilitated the auction where the trust affiliated with him was the sole bidder.
Dubey has denied the allegations and stated he would quit politics if they are proven true.
What Did Nishikant Dubey Say?
Dubey accused the Supreme Court of arrogating to itself Parliament’s legislative powers by striking down laws passed by the legislature and even giving directions to the President. The court is hearing a clutch of pleas challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, passed by Parliament earlier this month.
Dubey questioned the court’s critical observations on the Act’s dilution of the “Waqf by use” provision. He said it has sought documentary proof in cases involving temples, including Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, but has chosen to ignore the similar need in the ongoing case.
He further claimed that the court decriminalised homosexuality despite all religions considering it wrong and that Section 66(A) was required to curb the increasing misuse of online platforms to send objectionable content.
