Meet Justice Surya Kant and his Notable judicial decisions
- ByPravleen Kaur --
- 20 May 2025 --
- 0 Comments
Born in a middle-class household in Hisar, Haryana, on February 10, 1962. 1981 saw graduation from Hisar's Government Post Graduate College. obtained a law bachelor's degree from Maharishi Dayanand University in Rohtak in 1984. began practicing law in 1984 at the District Court in Hisar. in 1985 moved to Chandigarh to work in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. specializing on civil, service, and constitutional issues. acted as a representative for several banks, corporations, boards, universities, and the High Court. on July 7, 2000, earned the distinction of being named Haryana's youngest Advocate General. March 2001 saw the designation of Senior Advocate. Prior to being appointed as a permanent judge to the Punjab and Haryana High Court on January 9, 2004, he served as the Advocate General of Haryana. has been put forward on February 23, 2007, to serve two consecutive terms until February 22, 2011, as a member of the National Legal Services Authority's governing body. A member of several committees at the Indian Law Institute, a deemed university run by the Honorable Supreme Court of India, at the moment. obtained a Master's degree in Law from Kurukshetra University's Directorate of Distance Education in 2011 with the honor of earning First Class First. has also planned and participated in a number of prominent national and international conferences. assumed responsibility for the position of Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court on October 5, 2018.
On May 24, 2019, he was promoted to the position of Judge of the Supreme Court of India. Additionally, as of November 12, 2024, the Chairman of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. scheduled for retirement on February 9, 2027.
Notable judicial decisions:
In Jitendra Singh v. Ministry of Environment and Ors, Justice Kant wrote the unanimous ruling on behalf of himself and Justice Arun Mishra. Ponds, he pointed out, were public resources for shared use. According to him, plans that destroy nearby waterways—even when there are other options—violate Article 21 of the Constitution.
A conviction for murder, criminal conspiracy, rioting, and intimidation and insult under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, was at issue in Central Bureau of Investigation v. Sakru Mahagu Binjewar and Ors. The three-judge bench's conclusion on the proportionality of a 25-year prison sentence was written by Justice Kant. He maintained that the punishment of life in prison is not in any way limited to 20 years by Section 57 of the IPC. As a result, he supported the death penalty's conversion to 25 years of "actual imprisonment."
RELATED Blog
0 comments