OPINION | Justice Surya Kant’s tenure begins amid reform imperatives

Championing Free Speech, Privacy, and Accountability

He has been part of several important decisions aimed at safeguarding free speech and the right to privacy of citizens. Notably, Justice Surya Kant was a member of the three-judge Bench that put on hold the operation of Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code. He was also part of the Bench that appointed an expert committee to investigate the alleged use of Pegasus spyware on activists and journalists.

While Justice Surya Kant has often stood as a defender of free speech, he has also made it clear that freedom of expression is not a licence to say anything without restraint. In February 2025, while granting interim protection from arrest to podcaster-influencer Ranveer Allahbadia in FIRs filed over his remarks on a YouTube show, Justice Surya Kant’s bench came down strongly on the content of the programme. Calling Allahbadia’s conduct “irresponsible” and “condemnable,” Justice Kant observed:

“There is something dirty in his mind that has been vomited by way of this programme… The words you have chosen — parents will feel ashamed, daughters and sisters will feel ashamed, brothers will feel ashamed, and the entire society will feel ashamed. The perverted mind and the perversion you and your henchmen have exhibited…”

Defender of Civil Liberties

His concern for issues directly affecting ordinary citizens has been evident on several occasions. Earlier this month, a bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi sought a response from the Central government over the rising incidents of digital arrests and cyber frauds targeting people across the country, particularly those involving forged judicial orders.

The issue of granting bail in politically sensitive cases has remained a contentious subject in recent years. However, Justice Surya Kant has built a commendable record in this regard. He has consistently emerged as a defender of civil liberties and individual rights, a stance reflected in several of his landmark judgments. Justice Surya Kant was part of the Bench that granted bail to former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the excise policy corruption case. He was also on the three-judge Bench that granted bail to fact-checker Mohammed Zubair, who faced multiple FIRs over his social media posts.  He also granted interim bail to Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, who was arrested over a Facebook post regarding Operation Sindoor.

Justice Surya Kant’s concern for human rights and individual dignity often shines through in cases that may not attract political attention but hold deep constitutional significance. In Ajay Malik v. State of Uttarakhand, 2025 SCC, the Division Bench of Justice Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan quashed criminal proceedings against the accused in a case involving the exploitation of a woman from a Scheduled Tribe who had been trafficked and forced into domestic labour. While doing so, the Bench highlighted the larger issue of systemic abuse of domestic workers and called for urgent legislative and executive action to protect their rights.

“While any avenues for employment being opened to marginalised women merit celebration, we are at pains to note that despite their growing demand, this indispensable workforce has also been the most vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. Domestic workers often belong to marginalised communities, such as the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and Economically Weaker Sections. They are compelled to undertake domestic work due to financial hardship or displacement, further reinforcing their vulnerability.”

In November 2024, a seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, by a 4:3 majority, overruled Azeez Basha v. Union of India (1968), which had held that, being a central university, it could not be classified as a minority institution. The majority judgment, which was authored by the then Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, held that an educational institution established by a minority community will not lose its identity once it is recognised through a statute. However, Justice Surya Kant partially dissented from the majority on certain aspects, while agreeing that the Azeez Basharuling required modification and clarification to a limited extent.

Justice Surya Kant also served on the Bench hearing the presidential reference concerning the powers of governors and the President in relation to state legislation — a case with far-reaching implications for Centre–State relations, whose verdict is yet to be delivered.

Steering the Judiciary Through Pendency

As the new head of the Indian judiciary, Justice Surya Kant will have a longer tenure than his predecessor — a period during which he will be expected to confront one of the most pressing challenges before the judiciary: pendency. Over 4.73 crore cases remain pending across various courts. Equally concerning is the shortage of judges. In the lower judiciary, vacancies hover around 18.6%, while in the High Courts, the situation is even more alarming — as of October 1, 2025, out of a sanctioned strength of 1,122 judges, only 829 were in position, leaving 293 posts, or over 26%, vacant.

Justice Surya Kant, who will now head the Supreme Court Collegium, has been a vocal defender of the collegium system. In June, speaking at Seattle University on “The Quiet Sentinel: Courts, Democracy, and the Dialogue Across Borders,” he described the system as, “despite its imperfections, a crucial institutional safeguard preserving the judiciary’s autonomy.” Now, as the head of the collegium, Justice Kant will have both the opportunity and the responsibility to address those very “imperfections” he once acknowledged.