Justice Surya Kant, who is set to take oath as the 53rd Chief Justice of India on 23 November 2025, brings with him a judicial legacy marked by bold constitutional reasoning, administrative reform, and empathy toward citizen rights. Hailing from Hisar, Haryana, he will be the first CJI from the state, with a tenure lasting till February 2027.
Throughout his judicial journey — from Advocate General of Haryana to Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, and later a Supreme Court judge — Justice Kant has shaped several landmark rulings touching on free speech, privacy, governance, and accountability. His notable interventions include the Pegasus spyware probe, the temporary suspension of the sedition law, the Article 370 verdict, and proactive stands in farmers’ protest and real-estate fraud matters.
As he steps into the country’s highest judicial office, Justice Surya Kant’s docket features some of the most consequential issues of contemporary India — from PMLA review petitions to electoral reforms and digital-age regulation — setting the stage for a tenure that could significantly influence the future contours of Indian constitutional law and institutional integrity.
Background & appointment
- Justice Surya Kant is slated to become the 53rd Chief Justice of India, after the tenure of B. R. Gavai, on 23 November 2025, and will serve until his retirement on 9 February 2027.
- He is from Hisar in Haryana, making him the first person from that state to hold the CJI office.
- His legal and judicial career:
- He was designated senior advocate at the Punjab & Haryana High Court and, at age 38, appointed as Advocate General of Haryana — one of the youngest to hold that post.
- In Jan 2004 he became a permanent judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court.
- In Oct 2018 he was elevated to Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court; in 2019 he joined the Supreme Court of India.
Key Judgments & Judicial Themes
Justice Kant has been part of several high-profile decisions and has shown certain recurring themes and judicial philosophies. Here are some of the notable ones:
- Spyware / Surveillance (Pegasus case)
- In 2021, he was part of a 3-judge bench which ordered an independent expert committee to investigate allegations of large scale surveillance using the Pegasus spyware developed by the Israeli firm NSO.
- The bench held that indiscriminate spying of citizens cannot be allowed except as provided by law; the invocation of “national security” cannot make the Court a mute spectator.
- Later, Justice Kant remarked that while there is nothing inherently wrong with a country possessing spyware, the concern is against whom it is used.
- This indicates his concern for privacy, democratic accountability of state action and the need for oversight even in national security contexts.
- Sedition Law – Section 124A IPC
- In 2022, he was part of a bench that put the colonial-era sedition law (Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code) in abeyance pending re-examination.
- The bench directed that all pending trials, appeals or proceedings under 124A be held in abeyance; states/unions were asked not to register any FIRs, investigations or coercive action under that provision till reconsideration.
- This suggests he is willing to engage with legacy laws and their compatibility with rights such as free speech.
- Re-abrogation of Article 370 (J&K special status)
- In 2023 he was on the Constitution Bench which upheld the Union Government’s decision (in 2019) to revoke special status of the erstwhile state of Jammu & Kashmir under Article 370.
- The judgment held that J&K had no internal sovereignty that would preclude application of the Indian Constitution; the concurrence of the State Government was not required; Article 370 was held to have been temporary.
- That shows his role in major constitutional questions.
- Farmers’ Protests / Border Blockade – Haryana / Punjab
- In 2024-25, he led a bench dealing with the protests at the Shambhu border by farmers (case: State of Haryana v. Uday Pratap Singh).
- Key moves: the bench emphasised the need to infuse confidence in farmers; it formed a Committee to negotiate; it ordered border opening at least for emergency services.
- The bench also refused to stay a High Court order directing a judicial probe into a farmer’s death and reprimanded the state for non-cooperation.
- This reflects his sensitivity to social movements, state accountability and rights of protestors.
- Minority Institution Status – AMU case
- In 2024, he was part of a 7-judge Bench which overruled in part the 1967 judgment in S. Azeez Basha v. Union of India, in the context of whether Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) was a minority institution.
- Justice Kant partially dissented: he held the prior precedent needed modification/clarification, not complete overruling. He observed that institutions under Article 30(1) need to be “established” and “administered” by a minority community.
- This shows his careful-balancing approach in minority rights cases, paying attention to both precedent and statutory intent.
- Citizenship Act – Section 6A
- In 2024, in a Constitution Bench he authored a judgment upholding the constitutionality of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 (recognising those who migrated from East Pakistan to Assam) against Article 14 challenge.
- He applied tests of reasonable classification and manifest arbitrariness, and took into account humanitarian and historical context.
- Real-Estate / Home Buyers / NOIDA-builder nexus
- In 2025, his bench passed significant directions concerning homebuyers in the NCR (National Capital Region).
- In Virendra Singh Nagar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the bench directed registration of preliminary enquiries into alleged collusion between NOIDA officers and land-owners; also restrained project development without proper EIA.
- In another case, direction to CBI for home-buyers’ grievances against real-estate companies and banks.
- Earlier interim order protecting home-buyers from banks/developers under section 138 of NI Act.
- Signals concern for consumer protection, regulatory oversight and accountability in real-estate.
- Digital arrest scams / Social-media content / Regulation
- In 2025, suo motu the bench took up “digital arrest” scams (fraudsters impersonating courts/law-enforcement and extorting senior citizens).
- In another instance, his bench dealt with cases involving popular YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia (Beer Biceps) and others. The judge berated the language used, commented on decency and morality of public content, and asked the Government about the regulatory lacuna for social-media platforms.
- Also on cryptocurrencies/bitcoin extortion cases, indicated that unregulated bitcoin trading equated to hawala transactions and existing laws are “completely obsolete”.
- This shows his recognition of challenges posed by digital era, online platforms, new technologies, and need for legal frameworks.
- Performance Evaluation of High Courts / Speed of Justice
- He has been vocal about delayed pronouncement of judgments, especially in High Courts (e.g., Jharkhand HC). He asked whether judges track “how much public money was spent” and whether they are repaying society the trust placed in them.
- On multiple occasions he stressed dedicated courts, fast track trials for special statutes (e.g., UAPA, MCOCA) to avoid indefinite custody of suspects.
- Demonstrates attention to judicial efficiency, access to justice and institutional accountability.
- Electoral/Political Party/Tribunals & Information Commissions
- His bench is seized with issues around appointments of Chief Election Commissioner & Election Commissioners (via the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act 2023 which removed the CJI from the panel).
- Also dealing with vacancies in Information Commissions under the RTI Act.
- On tribunals: suggested circuit benches for the Armed Forces Tribunal, improved selection process for tribunal members.
Pending / Crucial Matters on His Docket
Justice Kant will carry an important docket into his CJI term. Some of the key “to-watch” matters:
- Review petitions in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) 2022 judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. Questions include whether discharge in the predicate offence automatically invalidates PMLA proceedings.
- The Constitution Bench Reference on timelines for assent of bills by the President under Articles 200/201 of the Constitution.
- The matter of revision of electoral rolls in Bihar (known as Bihar SIR – Special Intensive Revision) — concern about 65 lakh voters excluded, Aadhaar as 12-th identity document etc.
- Issues relating to Rohingya refugees / illegal immigrants — their status, rights to education, detention, deportation etc.
- Regulation of social media content, online platforms, and cryptocurrencies. As noted above.
- Appointment-related and tribunal-related institutional reforms (Information Commissions, Election Commissioners, Tribunals)
- Dedicated fast-track courts / special courts for terror, organised crime, etc.
What This Suggests for His Term as CJI
Given his track-record, some likely features of Justice Kant’s CJI tenure may include:
- A focus on institutional reform: efficiency in judiciary (High Courts & tribunals), filling of vacancies, performance evaluation, dedicated courts.
- Technology and modern legal issues: digital arrests, online content regulation, crypto/fintech, surveillance. Emphasis on ensuring rights keep pace with technology.
- Protection of rights balanced with state power**: such as sedition law review, privacy/surveillance, farmers’ protest rights, minority rights & citizenship issues.
- Tackling major constitutional matters: e.g., PMLA, electoral reforms, appointments, major statutory frameworks.
- A somewhat pragmatic approach: while liberal in recognizing protest rights and rights of disadvantaged, also mindful of national security, state functions, regulatory frameworks.
- Emphasis on access to justice for marginalized: home-buyers, farmers, counters to abuse of state power, senior citizens (digital scam victims).