Justice Surya Kant is the 53rd Chief Justice of India, having assumed office on November 24, 2025. Born on February 10, 1962, in Hisar, Haryana, he graduated in law from Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, in 1984 and began practising at the Hisar District Court. He became Haryana’s youngest Advocate General in 2000 before being elevated to the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 2004. He served as Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court from October 2018 and joined the Supreme Court in May 2019. Justice Kant is also the patron-in-chief of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA). He is due to retire on February 9, 2027.
The Commission for Air Quality Management has enforced GRAP Stage 3 measures across Delhi NCR following a decline in air quality levels into the severe category ahead of Diwali.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, heard a suo motu case on Delhi-NCR's worsening air pollution. The court questioned the growing commercialisation and elite gifting culture around Diwali, pointing out that heavy private vehicle movement, including large SUVs carrying single occupants, severely exacerbates traffic congestion and vehicular emissions. While the Centre cited a drop of over ninety percent in stubble burning cases across Punjab and Haryana between 2021 and 2026, the bench highlighted that vehicular fumes remain the largest contributor outside the farm fire window. Calling for a practical approach, the bench urged authorities to support farmers financially and deploy crop residue management machinery through gram panchayats rather than relying solely on enforcement. The hearing also touched upon previous directions regulating firecrackers to designated hours and silence zones around hospitals and educational institutions.
A political controversy erupted following remarks made by Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind President Maulana Arshad Madani at a conference in Saharanpur's Darul Uloom Deoband campus. Addressing the gathering, Madani alleged that Muslim identity, culture, and institutions are facing targeting, stating that demolished mosques would be restored and resound with the azan. Meanwhile, Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee Chief Sunny Joseph tendered an unconditional apology to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant over an unauthorised post on social media handle INC Keralam demanding the CJI's resignation. The party clarified that the media strategist behind the post acted without leadership approval and has been removed from his post.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant addressed the convocation ceremony at the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) in Bengaluru following weeks of student protests and uncertainty.
The Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, issuing notices to the Election Commission and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar as Chief Justice Surya Kant addressed attempts to pressure the judiciary.
On News Track, Marya Shakil reports on the Supreme Court taking a grim view of the INDIA bloc's march to the court premises against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision process. The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, observed that nobody can browbeat the judiciary and that mob entry into court premises is impermissible, issuing notices to Rahul Gandhi, Mallikarjun Kharge, Akhilesh Yadav, Mahua Moitra, and other leaders. The top court also agreed to examine the de-notification of Jantar Mantar as a designated protest venue. Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani evaluates the legal limits of challenging unanimous Election Commission decisions and questions the suitability of Jantar Mantar for massive demonstrations. The programme further debates the Delhi High Court refusing to halt a protest in Connaught Place, alongside severe political clashes triggered by Prashant Bhushan's admission calling for regime change, drawing sharp rebuttals from the BJP and responses from Congress.
A Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard multiple petitions regarding the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and recent Delhi demonstrations. The bench issued notices to the Election Commission and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over opposition petitions alleging voter deletions. The court raised questions over opposition leaders marching to court premises, observing that nobody can browbeat the judiciary. It also issued notices to the Centre and Delhi Police regarding alleged police excesses and the denotification of Jantar Mantar as a protest site, while Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan submitted an unconditional apology over a transport contempt case.
Leaders of the INDIA bloc, led by Rahul Gandhi, took out a march to the Supreme Court to file a judicial petition against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the SIR exercise. The move follows Chief Justice of India Surya Kant declining a meeting with Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge, advising the opposition to seek legal relief through judicial process as the matter is sub judice. Leaders from Congress, Samajwadi Party, Trinamool Congress, RJD, Shiv Sena UBT, and CPM joined the march. Rahul Gandhi urged the Chief Election Commissioner to resign, alleging pressure from the government. The BJP hit back, rubbishing the opposition's charges and asserting that the Congress is habitually blaming constitutional bodies for its election losses.
A political controversy erupted after Kerala Congress targeted Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on social media, demanding his resignation after he declined a meeting with opposition leaders on a sub judice matter. The Supreme Court Bar Association strongly condemned the remarks, stating that such posts belittle the judiciary and interfere with the administration of justice. Union Minister Kiren Rijiju and the Bharatiya Janata Party slammed the Congress party, alleging attempts to undermine constitutional institutions. Following widespread criticism from the bar association and political leaders, the Kerala Congress deleted the contentious social media post.
Tensions escalated across New Delhi as INDIA bloc leaders and Congress workers launched a 'Delhi Chalo' march demanding action and the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Leaders gathered at the Constitution Club at Rafi Marg while thousands of party workers and supporters, including Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu, assembled near Himachal Bhavan and Mandi House to march towards the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant, declined a prior meeting request from Rahul Gandhi, noting that multiple petitions concerning the issue are already before the apex court. Delhi Police invoked Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, restricting gatherings and deploying heavy paramilitary forces including the CRPF and ITBP. Traffic ground to a halt around Mandi House Circle as demonstrators sat on roads. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Home Affairs de-notified Jantar Mantar as a designated protest venue, assigning Ramlila Maidan, Burari Ground, and Shahdara for future demonstrations.
The INDIA bloc has called for a march to the Supreme Court from Barakhamba Road over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi stated that a memorandum would be submitted to the Chief Justice of India seeking a halt to the exercise and an end to alleged vote theft. However, Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant rejected the request for a meeting. While leaders like Arvind Kejriwal condemned police action against protesters, the BJP hit back, accusing the opposition of inciting disorder and misleading the public.
A Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson addressed a press conference countering allegations made by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi against the Election Commission of India and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The address clarified the ongoing controversy regarding the Special Intensive Revision and Form 6 modifications. Citing the Supreme Court's observations and orders, the spokesperson stated that Form 6 was not illegally altered, noting instead that an attached declaration framework had been upheld by the top court within the poll body's administrative discretion. Dismissing claims that the Commission favored the ruling party, the representative highlighted that Gyanesh Kumar assumed office long after previous general elections were conducted. The briefing highlighted that the electoral roll revision process helped remove 2.8 crore deceased persons, address 3 crore absent individuals, and eliminate duplicate entries to ensure the integrity of voter rolls. The spokesperson rejected calls to return to paper ballots, pointing to recent local body election results and historical decisions made regarding electronic voting machines.
Bharatiya Janata Party national spokesperson Sambit Patra addressed a press conference countering allegations made by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi regarding the Election Commission of India and voter enrolment Form 6. Rejecting claims that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar made unlawful unilateral changes, Patra stated that Rahul Gandhi was spreading falsehoods and attempting to create anarchy. Clarifying the proceedings before the Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Patra emphasised that the apex court neither struck down Form 6 nor called it illegal, but merely sought official records on hearing a petition. Reading from the Election Commission's September 26 statement and prior Supreme Court judgments on the Special Intensive Revision process, Patra explained that Form 6 was not altered; rather, an attached declaration under Annexure D was upheld by the court. He added that the issuance of judicial notices is routine procedure where both sides present their arguments.
The Supreme Court of India examined petitions challenging decisions by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar regarding the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant clarified that the apex court had not approved modifications made to Form 6 for enrolling new voters and directed the Election Commission of India to submit official records of its decisions. While declining an interim suspension against the Chief Election Commissioner without examining records, the bench noted that unlawful actions could face annulment. The Election Commission defended adding a parentage declaration to Form 6 under statutory residual powers, even as legal experts questioned whether changing statutory forms bypassed mandatory central government approval, parliamentary oversight, or created voter disenfranchisement amid reports of voter exclusions in West Bengal, Telangana, and Delhi. Alongside nationwide political protests over the electoral revisions, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar faces a vigilance inquiry ordered by Kerala Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala into a 2006 road project connected to the suicide of Malaysian engineer Lee See Been.
The Supreme Court of India clarified that it did not approve modifications to Form 6 introduced by the Election Commission of India during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process. The clarification came after the Election Commission stated in a press note that changes to the form, which required an extra declaration from first-time voter applicants, had been upheld by the top court. A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant issued notices to the Centre, the Election Commission, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi on a plea challenging decision-making procedures. While declining immediate suspension of the Chief Election Commissioner based on newspaper reports, the court demanded official records and file notings to examine whether decisions complied with statutory unanimity or majority mandates. The bench noted that any established unlawful actions could face consequences, including annulment, amid growing legal debates over voting rights and voter roll integrity.
The Supreme Court of India has issued notice to the Election Commission of India and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar in connection with a Public Interest Litigation challenging alleged unilateral decision-making within the poll panel. The petitions raised objections over critical decisions concerning the Special Intensive Revision exercise and modifications to voter registration Form 6, alleging that these actions breached statutory mandates requiring unanimity or majority consensus among the three election commissioners under the Election Commission Act. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana declined to grant an interim order suspending the Chief Election Commissioner based on media reports. The apex court noted that constitutional bodies must function in accordance with the law and affirmed that any decisions found to be improper or unlawful could be set aside. The court directed the Election Commission of India, the election commissioners, and the government to submit their responses within one week, along with relevant official records, file notings, and meeting minutes explaining the authorisation of the decisions.
The Supreme Court has declined to pass an interim order to suspend Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar following allegations that decisions within the Election Commission of India were taken unilaterally without consensus from fellow election commissioners. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana issued notices to the Election Commission, the three election commissioners, and the government on a public interest litigation petition. Senior advocates Vikas Singh and Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for the petitioners, argued that provisions of the Election Commission Act requiring unanimous or majority decisions were violated, raising concerns over voter list deletions across states including Delhi and Bengal. The apex court noted that an order cannot be passed without hearing the other side or solely based on news reports, while observing that constitutional authorities are expected to act according to the law and affirming that any illegal decisions can be overturned after due examination.
On the Judges Panel, former Supreme Court judge Justice Deepak Gupta and former High Court Chief Justice Sanjiv Banerjee deliberate on the Supreme Court's refusal to expedite hearings regarding Bengal SIR appeals ahead of upcoming by-elections. Addressing concerns over more than 37 lakh pending appeals and disenfranchisement, the panel examined whether judicial review is imperative to maintain transparent electoral rolls. Justice Sanjiv Banerjee emphasised that under the Constitution, every citizen is entitled to vote unless expressly disqualified, questioning the burden placed upon voters to verify their credentials. Justice Deepak Gupta noted that democratic safeguards require courts to step in rather than permit valid citizens to be excluded from voting, urging the judiciary to be far more proactive. Critiquing systemic anomalies and the executive's role in appointments to the Election Commission, the former judges warned that administrative overreach undermines public trust in democratic institutions.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the two-day National Green Tribunal international conference titled The Future of Environment and Climate Dynamics in New Delhi. The event brings together eminent judges, judicial representatives from 17 countries, and distinguished participants from India. The conference proceedings opened with addresses acknowledging Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant and Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani, followed by a welcome address from National Green Tribunal Chairperson Justice Prakash Shrivastava.
N Chandrasekaran has announced he will step down as chairman of Tata Sons when his tenure ends in February 2027, prompting the Tata Trust to initiate a selection process for his successor.
