Justice Sanjiv Khanna assumed office as the 51st Chief Justice of India on Monday, following Justice DY Chandrachud’s tenure. The oath of office was administered by President Droupadi Murmu in a ceremony at Rashtrapati Bhavan. Appointed to the Supreme Court on 18 January 2019, Justice Khanna will serve as Chief Justice for just over six months, retiring on 13 May 2025. Notably, he is among the few judges to ascend to the Supreme Court without first serving as a High Court Chief Justice. Justice Khanna was appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court of India on 18 January 2019.
CJI Sanjiv Khanna began his legal career as an advocate with the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983. He initially practised at the district courts in the Tis Hazari complex before moving to the Delhi High Court and tribunals. He served as the senior standing counsel for the Income Tax Department for an extended period and was appointed standing counsel (Civil) for the National Capital Territory of Delhi in 2004. Justice Khanna also represented numerous criminal cases at the Delhi High Court as an additional public prosecutor and amicus curiae. In 2005, he was appointed as an additional judge of the Delhi High Court and became a permanent judge in 2006. During his tenure at the Delhi High Court, Justice Khanna also held key roles, including chairman of the Delhi Judicial Academy, judge-in-charge of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre and chair of the District Court Mediation Centres. From 17 June to 25 December 2023, Justice Khanna chaired the Supreme Court Legal Service Committee and is currently the executive chairman of the National Legal Services Authority. He is also a member of the Governing Council of the National Judicial Academy in Bhopal.
Notably, Justice Khanna is the nephew of the late Justice HR Khanna, a former Supreme Court judge known for his pivotal role in the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case, which established the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court ruled that while no part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, is beyond Parliament’s amending power, the “basic structure” of the Constitution cannot be altered, even through a constitutional amendment.
Justice Khanna, as a judge of the apex court, has been involved in several significant rulings.
In a case concerning a journalist’s remarks during a TV show, a bench led by him declined to quash the FIR, emphasising that Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India [All citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression.] cannot override the fundamental rights protected under Article 21. He highlighted that while one may claim the right to free speech, others have an equal right to listen or choose not to listen.
In 2019, Justice Khanna ruled that judicial independence does not conflict with the Right to Information. Aligning with the majority opinion of a five-judge bench, he stated that while the Chief Justice could be subject to RTI requests, a balance must be struck between transparency and the judges’ right to privacy.
Justice Khanna was also part of a three-judge bench addressing petitions challenging the clearance for the Central Vista Redevelopment Project, where he delivered a dissenting opinion. In January 2021, a bench consisting of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna, by a 2:1 majority, upheld the approvals and clearances granted for the Central Vista Project. The petitioners had challenged the project on several grounds, primarily questioning the approval process. They argued that the Government had expedited the acquisition of regulatory clearances, bypassing necessary scrutiny in areas like finance, environment and other concerns. Additionally, they claimed that the public had not been adequately consulted. The majority opinion ultimately concluded that the Government had lawfully obtained all necessary approvals, with Justice Khanwilkar, who authored the majority view, emphasising the limited scope of the Supreme Court’s scrutiny over executive policy decisions. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Khanna stated that the project was marred by multiple irregularities. He specifically highlighted the Government’s failure to consult the public adequately, neglecting prior approval from the Heritage Conservation Committee, and securing insufficient environmental clearance.
In the 2022 decision on Revising Fee Scale for Arbitrators, Justice Khanna penned a dissenting opinion, specifically on the issue that in the absence of an arbitration agreement, the arbitral tribunal has the authority to set a reasonable fee.
Additionally, he contributed to several Constitution Bench decisions, including upholding the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India. In a landmark 2023 ruling affirming the abrogation of Article 370, a Constitutional provision that granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir, Justice Khanna stated that its revocation did not impact India’s federal structure.
The Supreme Court, in 2023, heard the Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan case, which questioned whether it had the authority to grant a divorce. Justice Khanna opined that the top court could indeed grant a divorce under Article 142 of the Constitution on the grounds of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage”. The Bench’s ruling was seen as a significant step forward in advancing divorce law in India.
In a separate case, when a five-judge Bench declared the Electoral Bond scheme unconstitutional, Justice Khanna, in his concurring opinion, argued that donor privacy did not extend to donations made through banking channels, as bankers processing the bonds are aware of the donors’ identities. He emphasised that the scheme violated voters’ collective right to information.
Justice Khanna also dismissed a plea from the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) seeking 100 per cent VVPAT (voter verifiable paper audit trail) verification of votes cast via Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). He upheld the Election Commission’s safeguards, which he believed ensured “quick, error-free and mischief-free” vote counting. This ruling came amid political controversy over the alleged malfunctioning of EVMs.
In one of his more recent judgments, Justice Khanna, as part of a Bench that granted bail to former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in a money laundering case related to the alleged excise policy scam, questioned the necessity of Kejriwal’s arrest.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna was part of the majority in the Supreme Court bench that overturned the 1967 ruling in S Azeez Basha v. Union of India, paving the way for Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) to assert its status as a minority institution. The majority opinion, written by former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, was endorsed by Justices Sanjiv Khanna, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra. This opinion overruled the 1967 decision, which had stated that an institution’s minority status is invalidated by statutory recognition. Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma dissented in separate opinions. The majority held that Article 30 of the Constitution guarantees the rights of minority educational institutions from the moment the Constitution came into effect.
Under CJI Khanna, major cases likely to be heard include petitions challenging the marital rape exception in criminal law, the brutal rape and murder of a woman trainee doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata, and the constitutionality of the Election Commission Appointments Act. The top court will also address the validity of the Bihar caste census and the scope of arrest under the PMLA. The Khanna Court will face a significant pendency of over 82,000 cases, including crucial Constitution Bench matters such as the constitutionality of sedition, the Speaker’s role in disqualification proceedings and the review of the Sabarimala verdict.
As CJI Sanjiv Khanna’s tenure commences, the Supreme Court Collegium will comprise Justices BR Gavai, Surya Kant, Hrishikesh Roy and Abhay S Oka.
The writer is a lawyer, and a journalist on the staff of The Statesman