The Supreme Court of India has recently received two new judges following the approval of President Droupadi Murmu, who sanctioned the appointments of Patna High Court Chief Justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi and Bombay High Court Chief Justice Alok Aradhe. These appointments were made official within just 48 hours of the Centre receiving the Supreme Court collegium’s recommendations, showcasing the swift process undertaken in this instance. With the swearing-in of Justice Pancholi, the number of judges in the Supreme Court who have their professional roots in the Gujarat High Court has now risen to three. Additionally, the induction of these two judges ensures that the Supreme Court returns to its full sanctioned strength of thirty-four judges, a position that had not been consistently maintained in recent times.
However, the process of Justice Pancholi’s elevation did not come without internal disagreements within the collegium itself. The collegium, comprising five senior judges, had recommended the names with a 4:1 majority. Justice BV Nagarathna recorded a dissenting note, voicing her opposition to Pancholi’s elevation. Her objection centered on the fact that with two judges from Gujarat already serving on the bench, the addition of a third would disrupt the balance of regional representation within the country's highest court. She stressed that such a move could potentially impact the fairness and inclusivity of judicial administration and might even cast doubts on the credibility of the collegium system itself, which has often faced criticism for being opaque.
Justice Nagarathna’s dissent was not only about regional imbalance but also extended to the circumstances of Justice Pancholi’s career trajectory. She highlighted the fact that Pancholi had been transferred from the Gujarat High Court to the Patna High Court as its Chief Justice, and shortly after, was recommended for elevation to the Supreme Court. According to her, this raised questions regarding the rationale behind such rapid movements and the implications they could have for future judicial appointments. Moreover, she pointed out that Justice Pancholi is now positioned in the line of succession to eventually assume the role of Chief Justice of India in August 2031, after the retirement of Justice Joymalya Bagchi, thereby making this appointment even more consequential.
The five-member collegium that took this decision consisted of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice JK Maheshwari, and Justice BV Nagarathna. While the majority was in favor of proceeding with the elevations, Nagarathna’s objections drew significant attention, once again putting the spotlight on how appointments are decided at the apex level. Nonetheless, with the inclusion of Justices Aradhe and Pancholi, the two long-standing vacancies in the Supreme Court have now been filled, ensuring that the court is functioning at its full strength, at least for the time being.
