A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi asked the office bearers of the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee to show cause as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them.

"Having nature to the nature of allegations, we consider it appropriate to examine whether the material warrants examination by this Court under Article 129 of the Constitution," the Court said.

The Court indicated that it will appoint senior counsel Arvind Datar and Gaurav Agarwal as amici curiae to assist the Court in considering whether criminal contempt or civil contempt requires to be initiated in the matter. It also urged the Attorney General to assist the Court.

The Court also noted that counsel representing the Kerala Congress has undertaken to file an apology for uploading the social media post.

The Court observed that no individual or political organization is above the Constitution and that the independence of the judiciary is not a matter of political convenience.

"Judgements are always open to criticism, however severe. But freedom of expression cannot become a shield for intimidation or interference with the administration of justice. Howsoever, high position a person may occupy, that person cannot be allowed to pollute the stream of justice," the bench said.

It added that judicial restraint must never be mistaken for institutional weakness, warning that any attempt to undermine the authority of the court is required to be dealt with an iron hand.

"The authority of this Court requires neither political endorsement nor approval. It rests upon the Constitution and the rule of law," the Court said.

The Court further said that where interference with the administration of justice is established, the law must take its course irrespective of the identity of the influence of the person of those who are responsible.

The Court has registered a writ petition in this regard following a letter written to the CJI by advocate Vineet Jindal on October 13.

In his letter, Jindal said the office of the CJI "cannot be treated as one whose continuance is subject to the approval or displeasure of any political organisation."

The post, he said, raised questions as to whether it remains within the bounds of permissible political criticism or warrants consideration under the law relating to criminal contempt of court.

Counsel representing the Congress today told the Court that the post was uploaded without approval or consent from the office bearers.

"Unconditionally we are tendering an apology. Next day a press release was also issued," he added.

The counsel added that the post should not have been uploaded, and was removed the same day.

"It should not have been done, no doubt about it."

At this, the Court said,

"Once the damage is caused… tomorrow it could happen to every profession, every institution. We operate within the four corners of the Constitution."

The matter will be heard next on December 15.