Kaul’s clarification followed the circulation of a photograph showing the two together at a Diwali gathering about a year ago. The former judge said the image was being interpreted as evidence of an ideological association that he did not acknowledge.
Speaking in an interview on Wednesday, Kaul said Das had met him only once or twice in his capacity as a journalist. He described his appearance at the Diwali gathering as a brief social visit, rather than an indication of involvement with Das or the political group to which he now belongs.
“He was a journalist, maybe met me a couple of times,” Kaul said. He explained that Das had pressed him to attend the gathering, although he already had another engagement. Kaul said he agreed to stop for approximately ten minutes before continuing with his plans.
The former judge also addressed suggestions that he had guided Das’s public activities. He acknowledged having offered advice about the language Das used, but drew a distinction between that exchange and a continuing mentoring relationship.
“I was not mentoring him,” Kaul said, recalling that he had suggested Das should “taper down a little” in his language. His remarks were directed at the tone of communication, he explained, rather than at the objectives or activities of the CJP.
Kaul said his concern reflected differences between generations over acceptable forms of public discussion. People accustomed to more restrained exchanges could find confrontational language uncomfortable, he suggested, while acknowledging that younger speakers sometimes communicated differently.
Asked whether increasingly forceful language might become commonplace in courtrooms, Kaul said restraint was important. He suggested that speakers should be mindful of how their words affected others, particularly those accustomed to a different style of debate.
The former judge declined to give the CJP’s younger members advice on whether they should moderate their approach to political campaigning. He indicated that offering such guidance could itself be portrayed as evidence that he was advising the organisation, the very impression he was seeking to correct.
The clarification comes amid scrutiny of the CJP following an October 13 demonstration at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi. The protest led to police action against activists associated with the organisation, including Das, and subsequent proceedings concerning the maintenance of public peace.
Das and fellow activist Ashutosh Ranka were released from judicial custody after furnishing bonds and written undertakings before a Special Executive Magistrate. The proceedings concern preventive measures and do not, by themselves, establish guilt in relation to any alleged offence.
The magistrate directed each activist to provide a personal bond and surety of Rs 50,000 and comply with conditions while the enquiry continues. Their undertakings included commitments not to disturb public tranquillity and to keep any future demonstrations within constitutional and legal requirements.
The activists also undertook not to call for protests at Jantar Mantar until the location is restored as a designated protest site under the applicable rules. Police have alleged that participants breached restrictions governing access to the area during the October 13 gathering.
The controversy surrounding the photograph developed against that background, with questions raised about whether Kaul’s presence at the earlier gathering signified sympathy for the organisation. Kaul’s account placed the encounter before the present dispute and described it as a personal invitation accepted for a short period.
Das had worked as a legal journalist before becoming associated with the CJP. Kaul said the activist was not attracting the same public attention at the time of the Diwali meeting, a circumstance he cited when explaining why he had attended.
The CJP activists have also faced requests to appear before the Delhi Police Crime Branch for questioning over the protest. Their representatives have indicated that they communicated difficulties attending an earlier scheduled appearance and were awaiting further arrangements.
The Crime Branch had summoned Das, Ranka and Shinde to its Rajouri Garden office on October 22. Ranka said the activists had informed investigators that they could not attend that appointment.
At a subsequent hearing, Das, Ranka and another activist, Ajinkya Shinde, appeared in connection with verification of sureties. The proceedings before the Special Executive Magistrate are scheduled to continue in the third week of November.
