SC warns Uddhav faction over public remarks on Shiv Sena split case delay
Synopsis
CJI Surya Kant publicly rebuked the Uddhav Thackeray camp for media statements alleging Supreme Court delay — a rare judicial dressing-down that underscores how politically charged the Shiv Sena split case remains, even as it enters its third year without a final ruling.
Key Takeaways
CJI Surya Kant on 15 May warned the Uddhav Thackeray faction to stop making public statements accusing the Supreme Court of delaying the Shiv Sena split case.
The case involves petitions challenging the ECI 's recognition of the Eknath Shinde camp as the official Shiv Sena and its award of the 'bow and arrow' symbol.
A separate petition by Sunil Prabhu contests the former Maharashtra Speaker's refusal to disqualify Shinde faction members.
The Supreme Court had declined to stay the ECI order in March 2023 but agreed to examine the poll body's quasi-judicial conduct.
The matter has been posted for hearing in July ; petitioners have been awaiting a final ruling for three years .
The Supreme Court on Friday, 15 May issued a sharp warning to the Uddhav Thackeray-led faction of Shiv Sena, cautioning its members against making public statements that portray the apex court as stalling hearings on petitions arising from the Shiv Sena split. The bench, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, made its displeasure unambiguous while hearing two interconnected petitions in the long-running dispute.
What Triggered the Warning
The admonition came after counsel for the Uddhav faction sought an early hearing date. CJI Surya Kant responded directly: 'First, you stop your people from going to the media and making irresponsible statements saying that the Supreme Court is not deciding.' He added, 'You seek a date here and then say that the Supreme Court is not deciding. We are issuing a warning. Be careful when using your words. I am not a person who will accept this kind of conduct.'
The bench further noted that 'whatever delay has happened at any stage of hearing, such irresponsible statements are being made,' and called for cooperation from both sides.
What the Petitions Are About
The two petitions before the court challenge the Election Commission of India (ECI)'s decision to recognise the Eknath Shinde camp as the official Shiv Sena and award it the party's name and the iconic 'bow and arrow' symbol. A separate petition filed by Sunil Prabhu contests the former Maharashtra Assembly Speaker's refusal to disqualify members of the then-Shinde faction. The Uddhav camp has argued before the court that the poll body failed to act as a neutral arbiter under Para 15 of the Symbols Order and disregarded the organisational support behind the original party leadership.
The Supreme Court had, in March 2023, declined to stay the ECI order but agreed to examine whether the poll body had acted within its quasi-judicial mandate while adjudicating the rival claims.
What Both Sides Said
Senior advocate Devdatt Kamat, appearing for the Uddhav faction, said his side was prepared to argue at the court's convenience, requesting 'a couple of hours' time for each side.' He acknowledged the petitioners' anxiety, noting they had 'been waiting for three years.'
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the opposing side, clarified that his camp had not made such public remarks and distanced himself from the conduct in question. 'We know how much pressure is upon the court. Our side hasn't done it. It should not be made by any side,' he submitted.
Next Hearing and What to Watch
The bench, which noted it was 'sitting here till 4 pm,' eventually posted the matter for hearing in July. With the case now in its third year before the apex court, the July date will be closely watched by both factions — and by Maharashtra's political establishment. A ruling on the ECI's recognition order could have significant implications for the future of the Shiv Sena brand and its electoral fortunes ahead of upcoming state-level contests.
Point of View
And it signals that the court is acutely aware of how the Shiv Sena dispute has spilled beyond courtroom boundaries into daily political theatre. The Uddhav camp's frustration is understandable — three years without a verdict on a foundational question of party identity is genuinely long — but venting that frustration through media pressure on the judiciary is a tactical and ethical miscalculation. What this episode also reveals is the structural problem: the Supreme Court's docket pressure means high-stakes political cases can languish, creating a vacuum that parties fill with narrative warfare. The July date will test whether the bench can finally carve out the extended hearing time this complex constitutional matter demands.
NationPress
17 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Supreme Court warn the Uddhav Thackeray faction?
The Supreme Court warned the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena faction for making public statements implying the court was deliberately delaying hearings on the Shiv Sena split case. CJI Surya Kant called such remarks 'irresponsible' and said he would not tolerate that kind of conduct.
What are the petitions in the Shiv Sena split case about?
The petitions challenge the Election Commission of India's decision to recognise the Eknath Shinde camp as the official Shiv Sena and grant it the party name and 'bow and arrow' symbol. A separate petition by Sunil Prabhu contests the former Maharashtra Assembly Speaker's refusal to disqualify members of the Shinde faction.
When will the Supreme Court next hear the Shiv Sena split case?
The Supreme Court has posted the matter for hearing in July. The case has been pending for approximately three years without a final ruling.
What did the Supreme Court decide in March 2023 regarding this case?
In March 2023, the Supreme Court refused to stay the ECI's order recognising the Shinde faction but agreed to examine whether the poll body had acted within its quasi-judicial mandate while adjudicating the rival claims.
Who are the senior advocates arguing the Shiv Sena split case?
Senior advocate Devdatt Kamat is appearing for the Uddhav Thackeray faction, while senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi is appearing for the opposing side. Both were present before the CJI-led bench on 15 May.
