Justice Surya Kant: Key Judgments And Notable Cases Handled By The Incoming Chief Justice Of India

After CJI BR Gavai demits office on November 23, Justice Surya Kant will take over as the 53rd Chief Justice of India. The judge will hold the office till February 9, 2027, on which date he is due to retire.For the unversed, Justice Kant hails from Hisar, Haryana and he would be the first person from the state to hold the CJI office. He was a designated senior advocate at the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the youngest lawyer (38) to be appointed by State of Haryana as an Advocate General. His judicial career began in January, 2004, when he became a permanent judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Fourteen years on, in October, 2018, Justice Kant became the Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court and a year later, was elevated to the Supreme Court.This article recapitulates some of the key judgments and observations made by Justice Kant during his tenure as a judge at the Supreme Court, which can reasonably be seen as indicators of his vision and motivations. It also sheds light on certain crucial matters which remain on the judge's docket, as he assumes office of the CJI. Pegasus spyware probe (Manohar Lal Sharma v. Union of India)In 2021, Justice Kant was part of a 3-judge bench which ordered constitution of an independent expert committee to look into the allegations of widespread and targeted surveillance of politicians, journalists, activists etc. using the Pegasus spyware developed by Israeli company NSO. In its judgment, the bench held that indiscriminate spying of citizens cannot be allowed except in accordance with law. This is an important concern for the freedom of the press, which is a vital pillar of the democracy, it said. While acknowledging that the Union of India can decline information when issues of national security are involved, the bench also stated that mere invocation of "national security" cannot render the Court a mute spectator. Subsequently, a sealed cover report was filed by the independent committee, which found malware in 5 of the 29 devices submitted to it. However, it was unclear whether the malware was in fact Pegasus. In April this year, Justice Kant expressed that there is nothing inherently wrong with a country possessing spyware for security purposes; the real concern lies in against whom it is used. "We cannot compromise or sacrifice the security of the nation", the judge emphasized.Sedition law kept in abeyance (SG Vombatkere v. Union of India)In 2022, Justice Kant was part of a 3-judge bench which passed a historic order for keeping the colonial sedition law (encapsulated in Section 124A IPC) in abeyance till it was reconsidered by the Union. In an interim order, the bench held that all pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to charges framed under Section 124A be kept in abeyance. Adjudication with respect to other sections may proceed with no prejudice to be caused to the accused, it said."We hope and expect Centre and State Governments will refrain from registering any FIR, continuing investigation, or taking coercive steps under Section 124 A IPC when it is under reconsideration. It will be appropriate not to use this provision of law till further re-examination is over", the bench ordered. It also held that those already booked under Section 124A IPC and in jail could approach the concerned courts for bail. Abrogation of Article 370 (In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution of India)In 2023, Justice Kant was part of the Constitution Bench which upheld the validity of Union Government's 2019 decision to repeal the special status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) under Article 370 of the Constitution. This judgment held that the State of J&K had no internal sovereignty and the concurrence of the State Government was not required to apply the Indian Constitution to the State of J&K. It was also observed that Article 370 was a temporary provision. Further, the bench upheld carving out of Ladakh as a Union Territory.Farmers' ProtestsIn 2024, Justice Surya Kant led the bench that dealt with the issue of Shambhu Border blockade by protesting farmers (Ref: State of Haryana v. Uday Pratap Singh). The P&H High Court had ordered Haryana government to unblock the border, which was closed to prevent movement of farmers from Punjab to Haryana. When the matter reached the Supreme Court, Justice Kant emphasized on the need to infuse confidence in farmers and his intervention led to the constitution of a Committee to negotiate with the farmers.While hearing in the case was going on, Justice Kant's bench agreed to a suggestion that the border needed to be opened, at least for access to emergent services across the states.The judge also refused to stay a High Court order which directed judicial probe into the death of a protesting farmer, observing that the same would ensure a fair investigation of the allegations against Haryana police. This farmer was claimed to have lost his life due to a bullet fired by Haryana police.When the farmers refused to interact with ...

Justice Surya Kant: Key Judgments And Notable Cases Handled By The Incoming Chief Justice Of India

Debby Jain

Tags