The Supreme Court of India on Monday questioned an advocate over a plea seeking directions to study whether onion and garlic have “tamasic” or “negative” qualities in nature.

The bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, dismissed the petition as frivolous and rebuked the lawyer appearing as party-in-person.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant questioned the petitioner, asking, “Why do you want to hurt the sentiments of the Jain community?”

The petitioner replied, "Because this issue is very common, in Gujarat, recently a divorce happened because of onions in food."

Expressing strong displeasure over the plea, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant warned the petitioner, saying, “Next time you come up with this kind of frivolous petition, you will see what we will do.”

The petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court of India, sought directions to constitute a committee to conduct research into whether onion and garlic contain “tamasic” or negative elements. The plea referred to the practices of the Jain community, whose followers traditionally avoid onions, garlic, and other root vegetables as they are considered “tamasic” foods.

Apart from this plea, the lawyer, Sachin Gupta, had also filed three other PILs. One sought directions to regulate allegedly harmful content in alcohol and tobacco products. Another sought directions to ensure mandatory registration of properties, while the third sought guidelines for the declaration of classical languages.

The Supreme Court of India dismissed all the petitions as vague and frivolous, noting that they were poorly drafted and sought unclear reliefs. “Such frivolous matters are burdening the Court,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant remarked.

The Chief Justice further observed that the Court would have imposed exemplary costs on the petitioner had he not been a lawyer.