Justice Gavai cautions HC judge against canvassing for elevation to SC, lack of punctuality

For representational purposes only.

In a stern word on judicial conduct, Supreme Court judge BR Gavai admonished certain high court judges for various lapses, including canvassing for their elevation to the apex court, and failing to adhere to punctuality and efficiency in their duties.

Speaking at the judicial academy in Kolkata on June 29, justice Gavai highlighted instances of judges not sitting in court on time, keeping judgments reserved for months and mistreating lawyers.

“Some of the judges in some of the high courts do not sit on time. It is shocking to know that some of the judges, though the court timings are 10.30 am, sit at 11.30 am and get up at 12.30 pm though the court timings are up to 1.30 pm. It is more shocking to know that some of the judges do not sit in the second half,” he said.

Justice Gavai expressed concerns about the integrity of the judiciary, emphasising the importance of judicial discipline and fraternity.

“Some of the judges even go to the extent of canvassing their candidature for elevation to the Supreme Court. They try to prove their case as to how they are more suitable for elevation to the Supreme Court than the other senior judges of the said court,” he underlined.

Such behaviour, he maintained, undermines the principle of judicial discipline and harms the reputation of the institution.

Justice Gavai, who is in line to become the chief justice of India (CJI) in May 2025, pointed out that the collegium (judges’ selection panel) works on a database having information of all the judges who are in the zone of consideration for elevation. “Apart from that, inputs from various sources including the opinions of the consultee judges in the Supreme Court who had an occasion to examine the functioning of such judges are also taken into consideration. In my view, such canvassing by judges is injurious to the principle of discipline that we should maintain,” he said.

Keeping judgments reserved for inordinate long periods, justice Gavai asserted, leads to “eroding the confidence of the public in the judiciary”.

The judge said that a common man still believes that the last hope available to him is the judiciary. “It is our duty to enhance the faith that this common citizen has in our Institution and to ensure that we perform in a manner which not only enhances its faith but also the dignity of this great institution to which we owe everything,” he said.

In his address, justice Gavai also underscored the necessity of federal contestation for India’s development. He pointed out that the Constitution allows for a balance between cooperative and uncooperative federalism, where different federal units can engage in both collaboration and contestation.

“While cooperative federalism is essential for maintaining India’s unity and integrity, competition, contestation or friction between the different federal units, when exercised in a democratic and constitutional manner, is equally necessary for the country’s overall development,” said the senior Supreme Court judge, explaining that such contestation furthers the principles of federalism and democracy.

According to justice Gavai, courts ought to play a pivotal role in resolving disputes between the Centre and states although Quite the Indian Constitution provides a detailed framework for the distribution of powers between the Union and the states by prescribing the union list, state list and concurrent list, delineating the subjects on which each level of government can legislate.

“The courts must carefully evaluate the scope of constitutional powers allocated to both the Union and the states when adjudicating disputes. Their role is to interpret and uphold the Constitution, ensuring that the balance of power between the different levels of government is maintained and that any encroachment on the powers of one by the other is appropriately addressed,” he added.

Another critical point in justice Gavai’s speech was the emphasis on constitutional morality. He discussed how judges have to uphold constitutional values over social or political morality.

“As the custodian of the Constitution, a judge has to consciously safeguard constitutional morality over social or political morality,” he noted. Justice Gavai illustrated this with landmark cases like Navtej Singh Johar Vs Union of India, in which the Supreme Court decriminalised homosexuality, reinforcing the principles of dignity, equality and privacy. He remarked: “By striking down this section, the Court reinforced the notion that the law must evolve with changing societal norms and protect the rights of marginalised communities.”

Justice Gavai also addressed the issue of judicial overreach, cautioning that while the judiciary plays a critical role in interpreting laws and bridging gaps in legislation, it must not overstep its bounds.

Even as the judge acknowledged that the courts they do act as catalysts in policymaking, justice Gavai highlighted: “The ultimate framers of the law in a democracy are the legislators, and the judiciary is vigilant in not overtaking that function.” He cited recent instances, such as the same-sex marriage case, where the Supreme Court recognised its limitations in making laws that fall within the legislative domain.

“The Supreme Court noted its institutional limitations in including queer unions in the Special Marriage Act as it would tend to create a law that directly falls within the domain of the legislature,” the judge said.

Justice Gavai pointed out that justice delivery has never been a routine mathematical function of analysing facts and applying the relevant law as it is. “Judges of the constitutional courts have to adopt a dynamic role and strike down legislation or policy when it is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution. A judge is the final arbiter in determining what a law is. In doing so, they shape the country’s legal landscape by balancing the interests of the individual and the society,” he said.

After justice KG Balakrishnan, justice Gavai will be the second Dalit to become the CJI. Following the retirement of justice Sanjiv Khanna on May 3, 2025, he will remain in that post till November 23, 2025.

Read more news like this on HindustanTimes.com