‘India’s beauty is in diversity’: What CJI Gavai’s tenure means for India’s judiciary

Advocate Sanjeev Sirohi

It is definitely very refreshing, reassuring, and reinvigorating to see that finally, on May 14, 2025, the 52nd Chief Justice of India (CJI) – Hon’ble Mr Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna (BR) Gavai – was administered the oath of office and sworn in by President Hon’ble Ms Droupadi Murmu during the auspicious ceremony at Rashtrapati Bhavan in New Delhi, following his formal appointment under Article 124(2) of the Constitution.

He will be the first Buddhist and second Dalit, after former CJI Mr KG Balakrishnan in 2007, to become CJI. He has an impeccable reputation and will have a tenure of over six months till November 23, 2025. The Law Ministry, on April 29, 2025, had issued a notification announcing his appointment as the 52nd CJI.

It must certainly be disclosed here that he was born on November 24, 1960, at Amravati. His father – Mr Ramakrishna Suryabhan Gavai, who was also known as ‘Dadasaheb’ – was a former Governor of Bihar, Sikkim, and Kerala between 2006 and 2011 and an esteemed Dalit leader who died in 2015, four years before his son became a Supreme Court Judge. Not many know that he initially wanted to become an architect, but switched to law to fulfill his father’s desire for him to become a lawyer. His mother Kamaltai is a former school teacher.

He joined the Bar on March 16, 1985. He initially worked with the late Mr Raja S Bhonsale, who was a former Advocate General of Maharashtra and High Court Judge, until 1987. He learned a lot from him and persevered hard to deliver his best!

It was at the Frezarpura ghetto in Amravati district of Maharashtra that he spent his childhood, studying in a municipal Marathi-medium school till Class VII. After a B.Com degree, he pursued law from Amravati University and began his practice in 1985 at the age of 25. After spending a few years in Amravati and then Mumbai, where he practiced independently from 1987 to 1990 in the High Court, he later moved to Nagpur and practiced in the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court.

He had represented the government as Additional Prosecutor (for criminal cases) and later appeared as Government Pleader in civil suits. He did not rely or specialize only in one field like civil or criminal but earned experience in diverse fields of law. He was offered judgeship in 2001 but took two years, and in 2003 was finally elevated as an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court on November 14, 2003, and on November 12, 2005, became a permanent Judge.

It would be in the fitness of things to disclose here that on May 25, 2019, after serving as a Bombay High Court Judge for 16 years, he was ultimately elevated to the Supreme Court. He has delivered many landmark judgments even in the Supreme Court, including upholding the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution and also the striking down of the electoral bonds scheme as politicians were gaining too much money from foreign countries. He has been a part of around 700 Benches and delivered around 300 judgments dealing with matters that pertained to different streams of law like constitutional and administrative law, civil law, commercial disputes, criminal law, arbitration law, environment law, education matters, etc., with many prominent judgments such as putting a red line on the executive’s “bulldozer justice,” granting bail to AAP leader Manish Sisodia, and demonetization of Rs 1000 and Rs 500 currency notes.

For my esteemed readers’ exclusive indulgence, let me reveal here that Hon’ble Mr Justice Nitin W Sambre, who is now the most senior Judge at the Nagpur High Court Bench, was most candid in laying bare about the CJI that, “He understands what the difficulties of the common man are. Money was never his priority. Even when he was a lawyer, 50 to 60% of the work would be on a pro bono basis. For buying a house, he then sold his four-wheeler and for a year, he would come to court on a two-wheeler. He is a self-made man.”

He encouraged his juniors also. His choice for Assistant Government Pleaders – Hon’ble Ms Justice Bharati Dangre and Hon’ble Mr Justice Anil S Kilor – later went on to become Judges of the Bombay High Court. While speaking from his own experience, senior advocate Firdos Mirza pointed out that, “He has a knack for making juniors comfortable. As a High Court Judge, he wouldn’t allow senior advocates to appear during vacation benches and made sure personally that the junior lawyers got a chance to argue in court fearlessly.”

It is most rejuvenating to note that the new CJI has clearly spelled out that one of his foremost focus areas as CJI is to draw an effective strategy to tackle case pendency across different courts in India. Frankly speaking, the new CJI was most forthcoming in underscoring most vocally stating that, “I have decided that I would like to work on the pendency of cases, right from the bottom level to the Supreme Court. Also, I would like to focus on infrastructure – so far as High Courts are concerned, the infrastructure is very good. However, it is still a big problem for lower courts.”

While taking a pragmatic approach on the changes that he could make in his relatively short spell of around six months, he candidly acknowledged that, “I don’t want to make any promises in the beginning. I’ve seen so many people speaking of so many things in the beginning, and at the end, they don’t accomplish 50 percent of that.” He has thus made it indubitably clear that he will let his actions speak louder than words! Very rightly so!

By all accounts, we all have noticed that in the last couple of years, the top court has been charged with stepping into and infringing the executive domain. This charge has been made more vocally in news channels and in media after its judgment that was delivered recently in the Tamil Nadu Governor case and following the observations that were made in the Waqf Amendment Act case. On this aspect, the new CJI was most forthright in conceding that, “I don’t look at social media. I’m neither on Instagram nor on X. As long as your conscience says that you are right, you should not be bothered about what one criticizes. Everybody has a right to criticize and a fair criticism of the judgment is always welcome.” No denying it!

To be sure, the new CJI also advised all Judges stating most fairly that, “A Judge should only focus on deciding cases according to their conscience, regardless of what others say. I personally say that a Judge’s judgment should not be affected by what the criticism is. A Judge is supposed to decide on the basis of the papers before him on the basis of law that is linked… One has to decide according to his own conscience.”

While recalling from his own personal experience, the new CJI recounted how he too many times was at the receiving end of a barrage of public criticism, most prominently when he was a part of a Bench that had strongly upheld the power of States to sub-classify reserved category groups (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) into different groups based on their inter se backwardness for extending reservation benefits. What really wins maximum accolades and grabbed maximum eyeballs is his most unequivocal stand holding precisely that, “My judgment on sub-classification also brought a lot of criticism. I also come from Scheduled Caste, but why should my children take up the share of someone more deserving from a village? Ultimately, it’s the Constitution that is supreme. After the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, the position is very clear – you can’t tinker with the basic structure of the Constitution.” No denying it!

It would be instructive to note that he was most vocal in asserting that in consonance with his steadfast firm alignment to Dr BR Ambedkar’s philosophy of equality and dignity for the downtrodden, and a day before taking oath as new CJI, he reiterated humbly that he considers his position as a Judge and head of judiciary an opportunity to strive for social and political justice. While interacting with journalists after visiting Shanti Stupa in Delhi on the occasion of Buddha Purnima, the new CJI was most emphatic in holding that BR Ambedkar’s belief in the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity remains eternally essential for India’s democracy and unity. He firmly reiterated that, “Justice must be equitable irrespective of a person’s social or monetary status.”

It is in this context that more High Court Benches must be created in big States like UP and Rajasthan, which have just one at Lucknow so near to Allahabad High Court in Eastern UP alone, and at Jaipur respectively, and lawless Bihar has none! It is West UP which owes for the majority of pending cases of UP with more than 10 crore population for whom Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge recommended a permanent seat at Agra yet not created even about 50 years later, and litigants of 30 districts of West UP, especially poor who cannot afford plane travel, have to travel whole night and nearly a day, about 700 to 800 km on average, all the way till not even Lucknow but right up till Allahabad which is more than 230 km far away from Lucknow to seek justice which in itself is the biggest betrayal of the Constitution, deepest burial of justice, and worst mockery of poorest litigants! It is no secret that Dr BR Ambedkar had recommended separate Statehood for West UP, Central UP, and Eastern UP but we see that West UP has not even a single Bench even though majority of pending cases come from West UP!

One is totally clueless as to why the Centre and concerned States are not taking any meaningful and decisive steps to create more High Court Benches, not even in big States, even though the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India in 2009 most strongly advocated for creation of more High Court Benches in States and yet only a few elite

States like Karnataka, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, and Assam have multiple High Court Benches? No wonder, in the India Justice Report 2025 that was released on April 14, 2025, we see that States like Karnataka with a population of just 6 crore having multiple High Court Benches with Dharwad and Gulbarga for just 4 and 8 districts only created in 2008 rank among the best States right on top and West UP with 30 districts and more than 10 crore people not even a single Bench and UP with more than 25 crore population which is more than Pakistan has just one Bench and it is a no-brainer that it has been listed in the worst category just like lawless Bihar and Rajasthan among others also figuring in the worst category of States! Five south states rank among top performers as for just 3.5 crore people of Telangana, a separate High Court created on June 2, 2014, and so also for Andhra Pradesh with just 4 crore population and we know that Andhra Pradesh Assembly just recently approved a High Court Bench in Kurnool and now discussions are underway on approving one more at Visakhapatnam but for Punjab and Haryana there is no separate High Court for both the States and so no wonder it figures in middle performer category states!

One fervently hopes that the new CJI will fervently work in this direction and seriously ensure that the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India that most strongly recommended creation of more High Court Benches in States is most strictly implemented at least in big deserving States like UP, Rajasthan, and Bihar which have been most unfairly denied to them! This will only serve to fulfill what he so strongly believes that, “Timely justice is the ultimate goal. Reducing pendency at every level of the three-tier justice delivery system through a long-term strategy is the need of the hour. The role of a Chief Justice of India was not one of power but of profound duty.” No denying!

In conclusion, one feels tempted to ask: When Supreme Court cannot tolerate discrimination and cheating in Mayor elections as we saw in Chandigarh when Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance, then why should unjustified and worst discrimination be allowed to be perpetrated perpetually without any rhyme or reason and that too in judiciary itself in distribution of High Court Benches in different regions like in UP, it is Eastern UP alone which has both High Court and a Bench and West UP, Bundelkhand, and Purvanchal has not even a single Bench, and so also among different States? One hopes he will address this so that this long-pending issue is settled now permanently! During his tenure as CJI, the collegium that will be led by him will have the opportunity to fill five vacancies that will arise in the Apex Court. He will also have to deal with 81,000 cases that are pending in the Supreme Court. One wishes him all the very best in his new avatar as CJI!

Here are his five key judgements in the recent past

Bulldozer Demolitions and Rule of Law (November 2024)
In this landmark ruling, Justice Gavai strongly condemned the practice of “bulldozer justice,” where properties were demolished without due process, often targeting individuals simply accused or convicted of crimes. The court emphasized the importance of following legal procedures and not allowing arbitrary demolitions. “The bulldozer cannot be the instrument of justice. The law exists to protect the rights of the accused and the innocent alike. No citizen shall lose their home or property without a fair hearing and a lawful order from the judiciary,” Justice Gavai said.
This judgment reinforced the necessity of upholding the rule of law and due process, setting strict guidelines for demolitions, including providing compensation for families whose homes were unjustly demolished.

Sub-Classification of SCs and STs for Reservations (August 2024)

In a significant case regarding affirmative action, Justice Gavai upheld the sub-classification of Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) for the purpose of reservations. This judgment ensured that the benefits of affirmative action were more equitably distributed among the most marginalized members of these communities. Pronouncing the judgement, he said, “Reservation is not a charity, but a mechanism for social justice. It is imperative that the benefits reach those who have been deprived and excluded from opportunities for generations. The law must ensure that only those who need support the most receive it.”
This ruling affirmed the state’s responsibility to identify and exclude the “creamy layer” within these communities, ensuring the policy’s effectiveness in reaching those most in need.

Kancha Gachibowli Forest Area Protection (April 2025)

Justice Gavai led a bench that intervened in the case of deforestation in the Kancha Gachibowli forest near the University of Hyderabad. The court halted the felling of trees and directed authorities to protect the area, emphasizing its vital role in biodiversity conservation. He remarked, “Nature does not belong to us; we belong to nature. The destruction of our forests is not merely an environmental issue, but a moral and constitutional one. The courts must act as guardians of the environment, ensuring that future generations inherit a planet that is capable of sustaining life.”

This judgment set an important precedent for the protection of ecologically sensitive areas, stressing the importance of environmental conservation in line with India’s constitutional duties to preserve natural resources.

Upholding Sub-Classification of SCs and STs for Reservations (2024)

In a landmark judgment, Justice Gavai upheld the constitutionality of sub-classification within the Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) categories for the purpose of reservations.

He emphasized the necessity of identifying and excluding the “creamy layer”—the more affluent and socially advanced members—within these communities from the benefits of affirmative action. This decision allowed state governments to create sub-quotas to benefit the more marginalized sub-groups within these communities.

Justice Gavai argued that this exclusion is essential to ensure that the benefits reach the truly disadvantaged members of these communities.

He cited Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s vision that political democracy cannot endure without a foundation of social democracy, underscoring the importance of equitable distribution of opportunities.

Protection of Fundamental Rights in Labor Disputes (2023)

In the case concerning labor rights, Justice Gavai made the following powerful statement, “The right to work and the right to be treated fairly are fundamental to a just society. Employers, irrespective of their stature, cannot be allowed to exploit workers under the guise of contractual arrangements. The legal framework exists to ensure that those who contribute to the economy are not deprived of their basic human dignity.”

Justice Gavai’s appointment is a significant step for the judiciary. He brings a strong commitment to fairness, inclusion, and upholding the Constitution.

Advocate Sanjeev Sirohi, based in Meerut Uttar Pradesh writes legal articles for The Kashmiriyat