CJI Sanjiv Khannas Landmark Verdicts: Shaping Indias Judiciary

Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna is ready to demit the best possible judicial place of work of the rustic on Tuesday on reaching the retirement age of 65 years. 

He took oath because the 51th CJI on November 11 ultimate 12 months, with a tenure of round six months in place of work.

After Justice Khanna’s retirement, Justice Gavai, at this time the senior-most puisne choose of the apex courtroom, can be sworn in because the 52nd CJI.

In his over six-year-long stint on the Supreme Court, Justice Khanna pronounced sure landmark verdicts.

He used to be part of the landmark judgments on Article 370, decriminalisation of adultery, electoral bonds scheme, EVM-VVPAT tally case, and so forth.

Before his elevation to the highest courtroom, Justice Khanna served as a choose within the Delhi High Court until January 2019.

Born in May 1960, he received his legislation stage from the Campus Law Centre, Delhi University. He enrolled as an suggest within the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983 and essentially practised taxation, arbitration, industrial legislation, environmental legislation, clinical negligence legislation, and corporate legislation within the Delhi High Court.

Here are the important thing selections given by means of him as an apex courtroom choose.

Places of Worship Act: The CJI Khanna-led Special Bench, in an intervening time order handed on December 12, 2024, ordered that no recent fits could be registered beneath the Places of Worship Act within the nation, and within the pending instances, no ultimate or efficient orders could be handed until additional orders.

The apex courtroom used to be coping with a grasp of petitions difficult the validity of sure provisions of the contentious legislation, which prohibits the submitting of a lawsuit to reclaim a spot of worship or search a transformation in its persona from what prevailed on August 15, 1947.

Waqf Act: During the process the listening to on a batch of petitions difficult the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, when the CJI Khanna-led Bench indicated passing of a keep order, the Union govt confident the Supreme Court that it could no longer de-notify provisions associated with ‘waqf by means of consumer’ or come with non-Muslim individuals within the Waqf Board.

Last week, CJI Khanna stated that the Bench, additionally comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and Ok.V. Viswanathan, didn’t intend to order its judgment on the intervening time level in view of his forthcoming retirement. It directed that the subject be indexed sooner than the Justice B.R. Gavai-led Bench for additional listening to.

BJP MP remarks on judiciary: A CJI Khanna-led Bench avoided entertaining a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) searching for contempt of courtroom motion in opposition to BJP Lok Sabha member Nishikant Dubey over his remarks in opposition to the judiciary. However, the Bench, additionally comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar, stated that the feedback have been extremely irresponsible and have a tendency to scandalise and decrease the authority of the Supreme Court, and had the tendency to intervene and impede the management of justice.

Amid ongoing hearings at the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, Nishikant Dubey, a Member of Parliament from Jharkhand’s Godda, all the way through an interview, had stated that “Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna is responsible for all the civil wars happening in India” and “to impress the spiritual warfare on this nation, handiest and handiest the Supreme Court is accountable”.

In its order, the CJI Khanna-led Bench stressed out that any try to unfold communal hatred or delight in hate speech will have to be handled an iron hand.

“Hate speech cannot be tolerated as it leads to loss of dignity and self-worth of the targeted group members, contributes to disharmony amongst groups, and erodes tolerance and open-mindedness, which is a must for a multi-cultural society committed to the idea of equality,” the apex courtroom stated, including that any try to reason alienation or humiliation of the focused team is a felony offence and will have to be handled accordingly.

EVM-VVPAT tally verdict: A Bench headed by means of Justice Khanna had stated that whilst it said the Fundamental Right of electorate to verify their vote is appropriately recorded and counted, the similar can’t be equated with the precise to 100 consistent with cent counting of VVPAT slips, or a proper to bodily get admission to to the VVPAT slips, which the voter will have to be approved to place within the drop field.

The Bench, additionally comprising Justice Dipankar Datta, had stated that giving bodily get admission to to VVPAT slips to electorate is “problematic and impractical”, and can result in misuse, malpractices, and disputes.

The Supreme Court had rejected the submission to go back to the poll paper machine as “foible and unsound”, including that the weak spot of the poll paper machine used to be well known and documented.

Interim bail to Arvind Kejriwal in ED case: In a judgment handed on July 12 ultimate 12 months, a Bench headed by means of Justice Khanna opined that former Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal is also launched on intervening time bail, given the truth that the Right to Life and Liberty is sacrosanct, and he has suffered incarceration of over 90 days.

The two-judge Bench, additionally comprising Justice Datta, referred to a bigger Bench Kejriwal’s plea difficult his arrest and next remand by means of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) within the liquor coverage case for an authoritative pronouncement at the questions of legislation concerned.

Asked Kejriwal to mull stepping down as CM: In the similar July 12 judgment of ultimate 12 months, the Justice Khanna-headed Bench had requested Kejriwal to take a decision on stepping down from the CM’s submit.

“We are conscious that Arvind Kejriwal is an elected leader and the Chief Minister of Delhi, a post holding importance and influence. We have also referred to the allegations. While we do not give any direction, since we are doubtful whether the court can direct an elected leader to step down or not function as the Chief Minister or as a Minister, we leave it to Arvind Kejriwal to take a call,” it stated.

Referring Kejriwal’s plea in opposition to his arrest and next remand within the cash laundering case to a bigger Bench, the two-judge Bench, additionally comprising Justice Datta, stated: “Larger Bench, if deemed appropriate, can frame question(s) and decide the conditions that can be imposed by the court in such cases.”

Interim bail to Kejriwal all the way through Lok Sabha elections: In view of the 2024 common polls, a Bench headed by means of Justice Khanna had ordered then CM Kejriwal to be launched on 21-day intervening time bail within the cash laundering case and had requested him to give up on June 2.

Imposing a slew of stipulations, the Justice Khanna-led Bench requested Kejriwal not to talk over with his place of work or secretariat, whilst out on intervening time bail. It clarified that the grant of intervening time aid will have to no longer be handled as an expression of opinion at the deserves of the case or the enchantment pending sooner than the apex courtroom.

As consistent with the SC order, then CM Kejriwal used to be averted from signing authentic information until it used to be required and essential for acquiring clearance/approval from the Lt Governor.

The Bench, additionally comprising Justice Datta, stated that it had handed a “very clear” order solving the timeline of Kejriwal’s “unencumber and give up” and used to be no longer making any exception to any one.

Electoral bonds scheme: In a unanimous verdict, CJI Chandrachud-headed Constitution Bench struck down the electoral bonds scheme announcing that denying electorate the precise to understand the main points of investment of political events would result in a dichotomous scenario and the investment of political events can’t be handled another way from that of the applicants who contest elections.

In his separate concurring opinion, Justice Khanna stated that in accordance with the research of the knowledge, he arrived on the conclusion that the electoral bonds scheme failed to satisfy the balancing prong of the proportionality take a look at.

“However, I would like to reiterate that I have not applied proportionality stricto sensu due to the limited availability of data and evidence,” he stated.

His opinion contained the knowledge as to be had at the web site of the Election Commission (EC) and the knowledge submitted by means of the petitioners.

However, Justice Khanna clarified that the courtroom had no longer opened the sealed envelope given by means of the EC. Further, he seen that almost all of contributions via bonds have long gone to political events which might be ruling events within the Centre and the states.

Article 370: A five-judge Constitution Bench, additionally comprising Justice Khanna, had upheld the revocation of Article 370. In a concurring opinion, Justice Khanna stated, “Article 370 was enacted as a transitional provision and did not have a permanent character. The abrogation of Article 370 does not negate the federal structure, as the citizens living in Jammu and Kashmir do and will enjoy the same status and rights as given to citizens residing in other parts of the country.”

The Constitution Bench, headed by means of then CJI Chandrachud, had ordered the Election Commission to take steps to habits elections to the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly by means of September 30, 2024, and stated that “restoration of statehood shall take place at the earliest and as soon as possible”.

It had left open the query of whether or not the Parliament can extinguish the nature of statehood by means of changing a state into a number of Union Territories, depending at the commentary made by means of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that statehood could be restored to Jammu and Kashmir.

In May 2024, the apex courtroom refused to check the Constitution Bench verdict and brushed aside a batch of evaluation pleas filed in opposition to its choice.