Today, On 13th May, with CJI Sanjiv Khanna’s retirement, his six-month tenure left a lasting legacy marked by bold steps on secularism, transparency, and judicial integrity. His decisions honored the Constitution and echoed Justice H.R. Khanna’s courageous legacy.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna concluded his impactful six-month tenure on Tuesday, leaving a significant mark on the judicial landscape with key decisions that reinforced secularism and addressed corruption in public employment.
Many believe he upheld the legacy of his esteemed uncle, Justice H.R. Khanna, known for his dissent in the ADM Jabalpur case during the Emergency.
CJI Khanna, known for his unconventional approach, made several groundbreaking decisions, including requiring Supreme Court judges to disclose their assets and initiating an inquiry following the discovery of cash at a sitting judge’s official residence. His unexpected move to make collegium records regarding judicial appointments public surprised many.
Just days before leaving office, CJI Khanna addressed political controversies sparked by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, who accused him of inciting “civil wars” in the country. In a strong response, the CJI stated that the Constitution holds the highest authority.
Although the BJP lawmaker avoided contempt action, CJI Khanna admonished him for undermining the Supreme Court’s authority, affirming,
“It is the Constitution that is higher than all of us. It is the Constitution which imposes limits and restrictions on the powers vested in the three organs. The power of judicial review is conferred by the Constitution on the judiciary.”
Taking office as the 51st CJI on November 11, 2024, Justice Khanna confronted legal challenges and political opposition while defending constitutional values. Shortly after assuming his role, he delivered a landmark ruling that dismissed petitions challenging the 1976 amendment to the Constitution, which added the terms “socialist,” “secular,” and “integrity” to the Preamble.
He maintained that Parliament’s amending power extends to the Preamble itself and emphasized that terms like “socialist” and “secular” are “integral to the Preamble making the prayers particularly questionable.”
Upholding a policy of zero tolerance for corruption in public employment, he led a bench that annulled the appointments of over 25,000 teachers and non-teaching staff in West Bengal due to irregularities in the selection process.
Demonstrating a compassionate approach, he acknowledged the adverse impact on schools from this mass annulment and allowed untainted teachers to continue working until December 31, 2025, with the requirement to complete fresh recruitment in the interim.
CJI Khanna also provided much-needed stability during tense situations, especially when several subordinate courts ordered surveys of religious sites in violation of the Places of Worship Act, 1991. In December 2024, he led a bench that prohibited new cases and halted coercive actions related to religious sites, effectively de-escalating potential conflicts.
He oversaw the challenge to the Waqf Amendment Act, with his bench’s observations highlighting significant legal changes from the previous law. The Centre submitted an extensive counter affidavit exceeding 1,000 pages. After thorough hearings, CJI Khanna later transferred the matter to his successor, Justice B.R. Gavai’s bench.
Heading a five-judge Constitution bench, CJI Khanna’s majority ruling determined that courts could modify arbitral awards under the 1996 Arbitration and Conciliation Act under specific circumstances. The controversy surrounding the discovery of cash involving Justice Varma drew widespread attention and scrutiny regarding judicial corruption, a topic often whispered about in legal circles.
Despite immense pressure, CJI Khanna maintained composure and addressed the situation systematically. He ordered a preliminary investigation by Delhi High Court Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya, subsequently withdrew judicial duties from Justice Varma, and transferred him to the Allahabad High Court without judicial responsibilities.
Following an in-house inquiry panel’s findings, CJI Khanna encouraged Justice Varma to resign and later communicated with President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi when Varma refused to step down. The decision to publicly disclose details of the initial inquiry was unprecedented.
On the administrative front, CJI Khanna implemented a no oral submissions policy for urgent case listings, requiring lawyers to submit requests via email or written letters, maintaining this practice consistently. He also mandated the public disclosure of Supreme Court judges’ assets and opened collegium records for scrutiny.
Under his leadership, 21 of 33 judges publicly declared their assets, and the collegium processed over 100 proposals, including two appointments to the Supreme Court.
The communal remarks made by sitting Allahabad High Court judge Justice Shekhar Yadav prompted a strong response from the CJI-led collegium, which summoned and reprimanded the judge.
CJI Khanna also authored judgments enhancing protections against arbitrary arrests, particularly under economic laws like the GST Act and Customs Act. His decision in the Radhika Aggarwal case emphasized that coercion cannot justify tax recovery, serving as a critical check on executive power.
He criticized the UP Police for misusing FIRs in civil disputes, describing it as a “complete breakdown of the rule of law.”
Also Read: CJI Sanjiv Khanna: “Won’t Be Hearing Cases That Require Reserving Verdicts”
Before becoming CJI, Justice Khanna was involved in significant decisions concerning the integrity of EVMs, the abrogation of Article 370, and the abolition of the electoral bonds scheme. As a third-generation lawyer, he focused on reducing case backlogs and expediting justice delivery.
Born on May 14, 1960, he studied law at the Campus Law Centre, Delhi University, and began his legal career in 1983, practicing in district courts and later at the Delhi High Court. He served as senior standing counsel for the Income Tax Department and as standing counsel (civil) for the National Capital Territory of Delhi, and he was also executive chairman of the National Legal Services Authority.
Justice H.R. Khanna, his uncle, made headlines during his tenure when he resigned in 1976 after dissenting in the ADM Jabalpur case during the Emergency, which upheld the suspension of fundamental rights. His dissent was viewed as a critical stand for the rule of law, resulting in his supersession by Justice M.H. Beg. Justice H.R. Khanna also contributed to the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973, which established the basic structure doctrine.