On February 17, 2026, the Supreme Court expressed deep concern over hateful and divisive public statements made by some Chief Ministers and senior officials. The Court said political leaders must foster fraternity and live by constitutional ideals. Chief Justice Surya Kant, heading a three-judge Bench, said, "We would like to impress upon all political parties to follow the principles of constitutional morality, values, mutual respect and self-respect." Justice B.V. Nagarathna stressed the need to "restrain discriminatory and communally divisive public speeches from all sides" and emphasized that "political leaders must ultimately foster fraternity in the country." The Court questioned if political parties had any rules to control leaders' public conduct. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing petitioner Roop Rekha Verma, said the Court could set guidelines governing speeches by constitutional functionaries to ensure faithfulness to constitutional morality without censorship. He pointed to the "normalisation of constitutionally unbecoming speeches by holders of high public offices," which have infiltrated administrative and law enforcement bodies. The petition detailed statements by Chief Ministers and officials that promote exclusion and humiliation of communities, negatively impacting public trust and governance. The Court recognized the seriousness of this issue but cautioned against a politically biased approach. Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, "Let this not be a populist exercise. It should be a contemplative and constitutional exercise." Mr. Sibal requested two weeks to modify the petition to address the Court's concerns. The Supreme Court is actively considering issuing guidelines to uphold constitutional morality and curb toxic public discourse among India’s leaders.