It is good to note that we finally have Hon’ble Mr Justice Surya Kant as new Chief Justice of India (CJI) who is 53rd CJI who was sworn in on November 24, 2025 by President Droupadi Murmu at Rashtrapati Bhawan in New Delhi. He is first CJI hailing from Haryana. Earlier Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal had on October 24 sent a letter to the then CJI Hon’ble Mr BR Gavai seeking his recommendation for the next CJI and who on October 27 recommended appointment of Hon’ble Mr Justice Surya Kant as the next CJI and was appointed as next CJI on October 30. He will remain in office for nearly 15 months and will demit office on February 9, 2027 on attaining age of 65 years.

He was born on February 10, 1962 in Petwar village of Narnaund region in Hisar district of Haryana. He was the first generation lawyer from family. His father Madan Gopal Shastri taught Sanskrit at a government school and his mother was a homemaker. His wife Savita Kant retired as Principal of a Government College in Panchkula.

He is the youngest of five siblings in his family. His elder brother Rishi Kant who is a retired teacher most candidly conceded that:
There was no advocate or judge in our entire family, or even among our relatives. In fact, Surya Kant was the first to gain admission to the LLB course when he joined Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak.” Rishi also conceded that it was solely his brother Surya Kant’s own decision to pursue law after graduation.

He passed his Class 10th from the local school in his ancestral village in Petwar in Hisar. He then pursued his BA in Geography at Government PG College at Hisar in 1981 and then pursued LLB from Maharishi Dayanand University at Rohtak in 1984 and started practicing law at the Hisar District Court and after an year then moved to Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in 1985 and specialized in Constitutional, Service and Civil matters.

He earned his first biggest achievement in life when on 7 July 2000, he became the youngest Advocate General of Haryana at age of just 38 before being designated senior advocate which he was designated on March 2001. He took over as third Advocate General of Om Prakash Chautala’s government in Haryana following the sudden resignation of his predecessor ML Sarin the previous day. In Sham Lal vs State of Haryana (2001), the Bench requested the Advocate Generals of both Punjab and Haryana to assist. He backed the petitioner’s stand that Lok Adalats under the 1987 Act cannot decide cases on merits and their remit is to facilitate settlements. The Bench graciously accepted his submissions.

It may be recalled that in Subhash Sharma @ Subhash Chander vs State of Haryana (2001), a Cabinet Minister was in dock for illegal mining in Faridabad. He informed the High Court that the Vigilance Bureau had initiated an enquiry and a formal FIR would follow. He batted most vocally for the State to be permitted to investigate the case and also acknowledged that it was important to take steps to check illegal mining. Eventually, the Punjab and Haryana High Court accepted his suggestion and directed the CBI to investigate the case.

In Court on its own motion vs Ajay Bansal (2004), the Punjab and Haryana High Court found substance in the allegations of attempts to scandalize the appointment of a Judge by two newspapers and by an advocate. He who was then Advocate General assisted the Court as amicus curiae at Court’s request which signalled institutional confidence in him beyond adversarial roles. The Chandigarh High Court held the journalists and the advocate guilty of contempt. He was elevated as a permanent Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on January 9, 2004.

As a sitting Judge, he completed LLM from Kurukshetra University through distance learning in 2011 and stood first. He was nominated as a Member of the Governing Body of the National Legal Services Authority on February 23, 2007 for two consecutive terms which ended on February 22, 2011. He assumed office as Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court on October 5, 2018 and was elevated to the Supreme Court on May 24, 2019. Before becoming CJI, he was also Chairman of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.

He has more than two decades of experiences as a Judge on the Bench and thus brings to the table a wealth of rich experience marked by landmark judgments that he delivered on abrogation of Article 370 which earned world wide publicity and so also on free speech, democracy, corruption, environment and gender equality. His judgments definitely reflects deep empathy for even ordinary citizens. He was part of the historic Bench of Apex Court that kept the colonial-era sedition law in abeyance directing that no new FIRs be registered under it until a government review.

He was part of the recent Presidential Reference on the powers of the Governor and President in dealing with Bills passed by a State Assembly. Interestingly enough, the verdict is keenly awaited as it will have potential national ramifications across States. He also nudged the Election Commission to disclose the details of 65 lakh voters excluded from the draft electoral rolls in Bihar while hearing a batch of petitions that had challenged the poll panel’s decision to undertake Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voters list in the poll-bound State.

It may be recalled that he was also part of the Bench which heard the Pegasus spyware case and which had appointed a panel of cyber experts to probe allegations of unlawful surveillance famously holding that the State cannot get a “free pass under the guise of national security”. Very rightly so! He was also on the seven-Judge Bench that had overruled the 1967 Aligarh Muslim University judgment that opened the way for reconsideration of the institution’s minority status. He penned a notable dissent in the ruling that affirmed the minority status of Aligarh Muslim University.

In hindsight, we had seen how he also had upheld the One Rank-One Pension scheme for defence forces calling it constitutionally valid. He is continuing to still hear the petition of women officers in the armed forces seeking parity in permanent commission. I am sure he will deliver rightly on this also!

Most commendably, he is also credited with directing that one-third of seats in Bar Associations of different Courts including the Supreme Court Bar Association be reserved for women so that there is gender parity. It may be recalled that in a judgment that underscored grassroots democracy and so also gender justice, he led a Bench that had reinstated a woman sarpanch unlawfully removed from office and called out the gender bias in the matter. Most rightly so!

He was also part of the Bench that had appointed a five-member high powered Committee headed by former Apex Court Judge – Hon’ble Ms Justice Indu Malhotra to probe the security breach during PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Punjab in 2022 saying that such matters required “a judicially trained mind”. He was also part of the Bench that reviewed the top court Vijay Madanlal Choudhary judgment pertaining to the sweeping powers of the Enforcement Directorate under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. He has authored over 300 judgments and most of them on very complex constitutional, criminal and administrative matters. He was also heading the Bench that had granted bail to former Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal in the CBI’s liquor policy case while also simultaneously ruling that his arrest by the CBI was followed by adhering to due procedure which is certainly a reflection of his nuanced approach to right to liberty and procedure of arrest and release.

It also cannot be lost sight of that he had played an instrumental role in resolving the farmers’ agitation from the Bench as a Supreme Court Judge by prodding both sides – the protesting farmers and so also the Union government as reported widely in media to the negotiating table at a critical point when matters were spiralling out of control with farmers’ leaders on an indefinite strike on the borders of Delhi. I am sure that he as CJI now will also address the worst inequality in distribution of High Court Benches in different States and different regions. By doing so, he will definitely add one more feather in his cap!

The bitter unpalatable truth is: Centre has favoured open worst partiality in distribution of High Court Benches in different States and different regions as I have just pointed out! Why is Centre falling head over heels to appease five elite States only – Maharashtra, Karnataka, West Bengal, Assam and Madhya Pradesh that they alone will have multiple High Court Benches? What is happening in our country? Similarly, why in UP we see that it is only Eastern UP which has both High Court at Allahabad and a High Court Bench so close at Lucknow only and nowhere else even after nearly 80 years of independence?

It is a matter of supreme irony that the most populated State of India that is Uttar Pradesh which tops the State list with maximum number of pending cases has just one High Court Bench at Lucknow so close to Allahabad in Eastern UP created 78 years ago in July 1948 and West UP which owes for majority of pending cases of Allahabad High Court has been attached with not even Lucknow which falls much earlier but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest betrayal of Constitution, deepest burial of justice and worst mockery of poorest litigants of 30 districts of West UP who have to travel whole night and nearly a day by train about 700 to 800 km on average most shockingly! From a legal standpoint, it is UP which tops the State list in having maximum number of pending cases and so also has maximum population and here too it is West UP which owes for majority of pending cases of UP and still leave alone High Court or Bench not even a Circuit Bench is ready to concede most disgracefully even though West UP contributes maximum to State’s economy also yet its natives are being punished most mercilessly even though Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge appointed by Centre itself recommended permanent seat of High Court Bench in West UP about 50 years ago yet not created till date most astoundingly even though on its recommendations High Court Benches created in other States like Jalpaiguri in West Bengal, Madurai in Tamil Nadu and Aurangabad in Maharashtra in mid 1980s even though it already had multiple High Court Benches and now one more created at Kolhapur for just 6 districts which started functioning from August 18, 2025! Why is it that only five elite States – Maharashtra, Karnataka, West Bengal, Assam and Madhya Pradesh have multiple High Court Benches? On what basis are they being favoured so unjustly?

Why big States like UP and Rajasthan have only one High Court Bench and so also why big States like Bihar and Orissa have not even a single High Court Bench? This worst inequality perpetrated so mercilessly in distribution of High Court Benches in different States and different regions is most baffling and has gone unnoticed for far too long! It must be put to an end altogether! It merits just no reiteration that the earlier this is done, the better it shall be because for far too long, we see that it has not been addressed even though this is directly concerned with judiciary itself! It brooks no more delay any longer now!

None other than the incumbent CJI – Hon’ble Mr Justice Surya Kant had himself candidly acknowledged while on a trip to Meerut Bar early this year that a High Court Bench in West UP is a dire necessity and must be created at the earliest as was disclosed by the President of Meerut Bar Association – Mr Sanjay Sharma. One fervently hopes that he ensures that the needful is done in this direction at the earliest and so also in all those regions and States where it is necessary as was recommended also by the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India 16 years ago! While outlining his priorities, he clearly said that he would focus on chalking out a strategy in consultation with stakeholders to reduce the huge pendency of 90,000 cases in Supreme Court and around 5 crore cases in High Courts and District Courts across the country. He said that the effectiveness of our democracy depends solely on the robust functioning of all three levels of judiciary.

He also said that mediation would be a game changer in the future and reduce pendency in the courts. He said that:
To use mediation to the fullest extent will be the focal point during my tenure as it is litigant-friendly and cost-effective.” On the first day as CJI, he set a new procedural norm that mentioning cases for urgent listing must be made in writing and oral requests will be entertained under “extraordinary circumstances” like in case of death penalty and personal liberty. This he has done to ensure that senior and eminent lawyers don’t misuse this facility most brazenly as seen till now and is discouraged which has to be definitely applauded most unequivocally! He also made it crystal clear that all request for urgent hearing would first be examined by the Registrar (judicial administration) before being placed before the CJI for administrative directions. He also expressed his reservations about same-day listing and in September had said that he would not order such listings “unless someone is about to be hanged” and “unless someone’s liberty is at stake, we will not list it the same day”! Absolutely right! No denying or disputing it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh