New Delhi, March 26 -- The Supreme Court on Wednesday took serious exception to what it described as an attempt to improperly influence judicial proceedings, after it was brought to its notice that the father of a litigant had allegedly called the brother of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant to question an order passed by the court. Disclosing the incident in open court, CJI Kant expressed strong disapproval of the conduct and warned of possible criminal contempt action. "He calls up my brother and asks him how the Chief Justice of India has passed this order. Will he dictate us?" remarked the CJI, visibly perturbed. The case pertains to a plea filed by Nikhil Kumar Punia, who claimed to have converted to Buddhism and was seeking the benefit of minority reservation despite being born into an upper-caste Hindu family. In January, the court had dismissed his claim and called it a "new kind of fraud". On Wednesday, the bench, also comprising justice Joymalya Bagchi, confronted the petitioner's counsel over the alleged phone call made by the litigant's father. "Now you tell us why we should not initiate criminal contempt against the father of your client. Should I disclose it in open court?" the CJI asked. The petitioner's counsel expressed ignorance of the development, stating that no such information had been conveyed to him. Unimpressed, the bench said the conduct amounted to "sheer misconduct" and advised the lawyer to consider withdrawing from the case after verifying the facts. "As counsel, you should first consider withdrawing. Even if he is outside India, I know how to deal with such people," said the bench, adding that such behaviour will not be tolerated. The bench also rejected any suggestion that such actions could influence the course of proceedings. "Nobody dares to do this. And you think I will transfer the case because of this? I have dealt with such elements for the last 23 years," the CJI said. He further indicated that the court viewed the conduct as part of a broader attempt to "manipulate" proceedings. At the previous hearing on January 28, the bench had termed the plea a "new type of fraud" after the petitioner disclosed that he was born into the Jaat Puniya community before converting to Buddhism. It had dismissed a plea by Punia and another upper category candidate from Haryana, who sought to claim minority benefits as Buddhists for admission to a minority-run medical college in Uttar Pradesh, despite appearing for NEET-PG 2025 under the general category. At the time, the bench questioned how upper-caste general category candidates could claim minority status to secure admission benefits meant for disadvantaged groups. The petitioners had obtained Buddhist minority certificates from a sub-divisional officer in Hisar in February last year. However, while appearing for NEET-PG 2025, they declared themselves as belonging to the general category and not falling within the economically weaker sections. The court noted that the claim of conversion appeared to have been made only after the candidates failed to secure admission in an earlier attempt, raising doubts about the bona fides of the move. Flagging serious concerns, the bench had directed the Haryana government to explain the legal framework governing the issuance of minority certificates and whether such certificates could be granted to upper-caste individuals who had declared themselves as general category candidates in competitive examinations. When the matter was taken up on Wednesday, the court did not proceed to examine the merits further, noting that the state of Haryana had yet to file its compliance report pursuant to the earlier directions. "Let the state file its compliance report. If not, the chief secretary of Haryana shall remain personally present," the bench ordered. The matter is now listed for hearing next week....