Justice Pancholi, upon becoming a top court judge, would be in line to become the Chief Justice of India in October 2031 after Justice Joymalya Bagchi's retirement.
New Delhi: Justice B.V. Nagarathna of the Supreme Court has registered a strong dissent to apex court collegium's recommendation to elevate Patna High Court Chief Justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi to the apex court, saying his appointment would be “counter-productive” to justice and erode the credibility of the collegium system.
The five-member collegium comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Nagarathna had on Monday recommended to the Centre, the names of Bombay High Court Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Pancholi for elevation to the top court.
Justice Pancholi, upon becoming a top court judge, would be in line to become the Chief Justice of India in October 2031 after Justice Joymalya Bagchi's retirement.
Justice Nagarathna, the sole woman top court judge, underlined Justice Pancholi's elevation, despite his lower seniority and the circumstances surrounding his earlier transfer from the Gujarat High Court to Patna High Court, would be “counter-productive” to the judiciary.
Justice Nagarathna, noted that pushing ahead with his appointment could erode “whatever credibility the collegium system still holds,” sources said.
Justice Nagarathna's objections partly stemmed from Justice Pancholi's July 2023 transfer from the Gujarat High Court to the Patna High Court. She is learnt to have said it was "not a routine transfer, but a carefully considered move made after consultations with several senior judges, all of whom concurred with the decision".
Justice Nagarathna also flagged issues over regional representation in the top court. Her dissent note traces her disagreement to May when the idea of elevating Justice Pancholi was first considered. Later, Justice N.V. Anjaria was elevated to the top court ahead of Justice Pancholi.
When the name of Justice Pancholi re-emerged after three months, Justice Nagarathna wrote the dissent.
In a statement on the issue, NGO Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) said:
“It is not clear what has swayed the Supreme Court collegium in recommending Justice Pancholi to the Supreme Court, since Justice Pancholi is not merely the third judge from Gujarat to be elevated to the Supreme Court, (disproportionate to the size of the Gujarat High Court and leaving various other High Courts unrepresented) but he is also 57th in all India seniority list of High Court judges.”
