Is Chief Justice #SupremeCourtOfIndis authorised U/Constitution to pass baseless derogatory comments

it's a case that Petitioner has provided services without complaint for 129 months in interest of Bank of India as per orders of Recovery officer DRT Pune (RO). Bank paid charges only of 6 months and did not pay thereafter despite repeated orders of RO. Bank obtained order dated 24.7.2008 from Presiding Officer DRT Pune directing RO to collect charges of Petitioner from Auction Purchasers on basis of frustrated document "Acknowledgement of Possession" which was signed by Auction Purchasers in anticipation of possession, but possession could not be handed to them therefore Auction purchasers refused to pay as per order. After waiting for about 60 months then petitioner filed WP b4 high court Bombay who directed DRAT to expedite L589 filed by Auction Purchasers but was dismissed by default, then Petitioner filed petition 28/12 b4 MSMED Facilitation council Pune, who granted an award dated 12.9.12 directing Bank to pay amount Rs 1.62 crores as per sec 16 within a month failing which addnl 24% PA in similar way as per sec 16, Bank did not pay but unsuccessfully filed application as per sec 33 of arbitration act b4 Council. Petitioner filed Darkhast 1741/12 and attached accounts of Bank as per Order 21 rule 46 of CPC, therefore Bank immediately filed WP2877/13 and paid the amount there. Bank then filed MCA 352/13 before District court which was dismissed on merits, no 2nd appeal is allowed against award@MSMED Act 2006, but Bank filed ARA15/14 b4 high court Bombay which was dismissed after imposing fine of 5 lacs. Then Petitioner recieved  Rs 1.22 Cr in darkhast 1741/12 and while proceedings were on the Bank approached Supreme court vide SLP which was converted to CA5150/17 where in the supreme Cour relied on fraudulent/frustrated document "Acknowledgement of possession" dated 13.11.2006 to set aside the award & split the liability as till 24.7.2008 on Bank and thereafter on auction purchasers by impleading them (one expired in 2011) as litigants vide order dated 5.12.17. Petitioner repeatedly submitted that the acknowledgement was fabricated/frustrated and that one auction purchaser had expired in 2011, but supreme court deliberately ignored pleas of Petitioner. RP777/18 was dismissed. I could not file Curative as i could not afford payment for COMPETENCY CERTIFICATE mandatorily required for filing Curative. When Bank tried to stop execution proceedings in Darkhast 1741/12 petitioner brought issue of nullity of order, but it was not considered. therefore, petitioner approached supreme court wp 189/18 for clarification wherein during argument the petitioner was told that supreme court has not denied any rights of Petitioner as per award but since it is bank/executioner court at Pune who has refused therefore the appropriate remedy is before high court Bombay u/a 226. petitioner withdrew WP189/18 and filed wp3809/18 before high court Bombay which was decided on 18.09.25 just setting aside the arrest warrant for not paying Rs 1.22 crores back, and without ascertaining rights of petitioner. Petitioner had also challenged order dated 18.2.21-26.2.2021 in darkhast 1741/12 refusing to hold order dated 5.12.17 in CA5150/17 of supreme court as nullity for being against deceased on basis of fraud and allow petitioner DELAYED payment with penalty @MSMED ACT Vide WP9159/22 but the court just set aside the orders and did not ascertain rights of Petitioner @msmed ct 2006. Petitioner therefore filed slp12289/26 & 12290/26 BEFORE supreme court which were dismissed on 2.4.2026 (copy of order is attached hereto) with baseless undeserved derogatory remarks. the total as per sec 16 and as per award have astronomically escalated in the range of Rs 4000 & Rs 5000 crores for the total period from Bank because of inaction/delay before the Supreme court. I have done no mistake from whatsoever angle. i am a small MSE whose is rendered incomeless for 19 years forced to run from court to court. when already reeling in financial distress and problems of survival, and repayment such remarks from Highest seat of justice force me to nothing but commit suicide. I appeared religiously as party in person without committing any mistake throughout. it appears that the Chief Justice is highly biased in favor of Bank and wants Bank to enjoy fruits of violations of delayed payment.  i have filed review promptly but as it will be before the same judges with preconceived ideas i am afraid that there would be no change. by committing suicide i may be relieved of pains, but it would be difficult for those who paid for my survival on temporary loans. I have to fight it out.

This shows that Chief Justice is abusing absolute authority & blanket immunity  to frustrate and oppress the legitimate claim of Petitioner @MSMED Act 2006 by passing humiliating baseless remarks vide order dated 2.4.2026 in SLP12289/26 &12290/26, The chief justice did not see the record submitted in SLP that the Petitioner was granted liberty by Supreme Court itself by order 12.3.2018 in WP189/18 to approach High Court Bombay, therefore approaching High Court cannot be basis for saying ................ "3. The petitioner appears to be a blackmailer who is abusing the judicial platform to pursue dishonest and undue claims. He has gone to the extent of challenging a Supreme Court judgment and seeking its nullity before the High Court. Therefore, we find his claims to be �x-�aci� false, dishonest, and untenable.
4. While dismissing these petitions, we caution the petitioner that if he is found to be further involved in abusing the process of law, the Courts concerned are directed to impose exemplary costs upon him." 

It may be observed how highest seat of justice has abused authority for grounds justification for setting aside legitimate claim of award @MSMED ACT ascertained concurrently by all lower courts, partially executed and is not denied by Supreme court in CA5150/17 also as exfacia, false, dishonest and untenable. The Hon'ble Chief Justice has further abused authority to deny rights guaranteed under statute/constitution also for approaching High Court as per order of Supreme court. Incidentally this is so when in case of fraud The sec 44 of the Evidence Act allows recall of order and supreme court itself has passed numerous judgements that orders obtained by fraud/misrepresentation/suppression of facts can be agitated/challenged even before lower courts.

Such abuse of authority crushing rights of humble & poor for no mistake cannot be allowed under the guise of independence of judiciary, necessity of which is appreciated but has to be curtailed by Rule of law. The objectives of public policy/law/rules/procedures must be of prime Importance in passing judgements.

There is necessity of an independent "JUDICIAL CONDUCT COMMISSION' under the President to take care only of misdeeds by advocates/judges/Judicial staff in execution of their responsibility & duties.