Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud has written to the Union Legislation Ministry, naming Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the second-most senior choose of Supreme Courtroom, as his successor.
When permitted by the federal government, Justice Khanna would be the 51st Chief Justice of India and could have a tenure of 6 months in workplace earlier than retiring on Could 13, 2025.
With CJI Chandrachud set to retire on November 10, the federal government, as per conference, had written to him final week requesting him to call his successor in workplace.
Justice Khanna had enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983. He initially practiced on the district courts on the Tis Hazari advanced and later moved to the Excessive Courtroom of Delhi and tribunals.
He had an extended tenure because the Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue Tax Division and in 2004, was appointed Standing Counsel (Civil) for the Nationwide Capital Territory of Delhi.
He had additionally appeared and argued in numerous felony circumstances on the Delhi Excessive Courtroom as an Further Public Prosecutor and an amicus curie.
He was elevated as a further choose of the Delhi Excessive Courtroom in 2005 and was made a everlasting choose in 2006. Whereas he was a choose of the Delhi Excessive Courtroom, Justice Khanna additionally held the place of Chairman/Decide-in-charge, Delhi Judicial Academy, Delhi Worldwide Arbitration Centre and the District Courtroom Mediation Centres.
He was elevated as a Decide of the Supreme Courtroom on January 18, 2019. Justice Khanna is among the many few who have been elevated to the Supreme Courtroom even earlier than changing into a Chief Justice of any Excessive Courtroom.
He held the publish of Chairman, Supreme Courtroom Authorized Service Committee, from June 17 2023 until December 25, 2023 and is presently the Govt Chairman of Nationwide Authorized Providers Authority, and a member of the Governing Counsel of the Nationwide Judicial Academy, Bhopal.
As a choose of the apex courtroom, Justice Khanna has been part of a number of essential rulings.
Within the case in opposition to a journalist over remarks throughout a TV present, a Bench presided by his mentioned that Article 19(1)(a) can’t be pressed into service for defeating the elemental proper assured by Article 21 as if one claims to proper to speech, the others have the correct to hear or decline to hear, and declined to quash the FIR.
A Bench of which he was half additionally discovered no infirmity within the clearance to the celebrated Central Vista Challenge. He has additionally been a part of Structure Bench rulings, just like the one upholding the abrogation of Article 370 of the Structure, and that putting down the 2018 electoral bonds scheme.
