Get Our Extension

Jagdish Singh Khehar

From Wikipedia, in a visual modern way
Jagdish Singh Khehar
Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar (cropped).jpg
44th Chief Justice of India
In office
4 January 2017 – 27 August 2017
Appointed byPranab Mukherjee
Preceded byT. S. Thakur
Succeeded byDipak Misra
Judge of the Supreme Court of India
In office
13 September 2011 – 3 January 2017
Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court
In office
8 August 2010 – 12 September 2011
Preceded byP. D. Dinakaran
Succeeded byVikramajit Sen
7th Chief Justice of the Uttarakhand High Court
In office
29 November 2009 – 7 August 2010
Preceded byTarun Agarwala (acting)
Succeeded byBarin Ghosh
Personal details
Born (1952-08-28) 28 August 1952 (age 70)
Nairobi, British Kenya, now Nairobi, Kenya[1]
NationalityIndian (1965-present); Kenyan (1963-1965); British (1952-1963)
Alma materPanjab University, Chandigarh
OccupationJudge
ReligionSikhism
Source:[2]

Jagdish Singh Khehar (born 28 August 1952) is a senior advocate who was the 44th Chief Justice of India (CJI).[2][3] Khehar is the first CJI from the Sikh community.[4][5] He has been a judge in Supreme Court of India from 13 September 2011 to 27 August 2017 upon superannuation.[6] He served for a brief period but gave many landmark Judgements such as the Triple Talaq and the Right to Privacy verdict. He was succeeded by Justice Dipak Misra.

Discover more about Jagdish Singh Khehar related topics

Chief Justice of India

Chief Justice of India

The Chief Justice of India is the chief Judge of the Supreme Court of India as well as the highest-ranking officer of the Indian Judiciary. The Constitution of India grants power to the President of India to appoint, in consultation with the outgoing chief justice, the next chief justice, who will serve until they reach the age of sixty-five or are removed by impeachment. As per convention, the name suggested by the incumbent chief justice is almost always the next senior most judge in the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court of India is the supreme judicial authority of India and is the highest court of the Republic of India under the constitution. It is the most senior constitutional court, has the final decision in all legal matters except for personal laws, and also has the power of judicial review. The Chief Justice of India is the Head and Chief Judge of the Supreme Court, which consists of a maximum of 34 judges, and has extensive powers in the form of original, appellate and advisory jurisdictions. New judges here are uniquely nominated by existing judges and other branches of government have neglible say.

Right to Privacy verdict

Right to Privacy verdict

Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. vs Union Of India & Ors. (2017), also known as Right to Privacy verdict is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India, which holds that the right to privacy is protected as a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Dipak Misra

Dipak Misra

Justice Dipak Misra is an Indian jurist who served as the 45th Chief Justice of India from 28 August 2017 till 2 October 2018. He is also former Chief Justice of the Patna and Delhi High Courts. He is the nephew of Justice Ranganath Misra, who was the 21st Chief Justice from 1990 to 1991. He succeeded J. S. Khehar, the 44th Chief Justice.

Notable judgements

Justice J.S. Khehar led the five-judge Constitution Bench in Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association v. Union of India [2016(5) SCC 1]. By enabling the collegium system to continue, Justice J. S. Khehar, quashed the NJAC Act and also declared 99th Amendment to the Constitution unconstitutional. The majority concluded this judgment:

While adjudicating upon the merits of the submissions advanced at the hands of the learned counsel for the rival parties, I have arrived at the conclusion, that clauses (a) and (b) of Article 124A(1) do not provide an adequate representation, to the judicial component in the NJAC, clauses (a) and (b) of Article 124A(1) are insufficient to preserve the primacy of the judiciary, in the matter of selection and appointment of Judges, to the higher judiciary (as also transfer of Chief Justices and Judges, from one High Court to another). The same are accordingly, violative of the principle of "independence of the judiciary." Justice Khehar further explained:

that clause (c) of Article 124 A (1) is ultra-vires the provisions of the Constitution, because of the inclusion of the Union Minister in charge of Law and Justice as an ex officio Member of the NJAC. Clause (c) of Article 124A (1), in my view, impinges upon the principles of "independence of the judiciary", as well as, "separation of powers". It has also been concluded by me, that clause (d) of Article 124A (1) which provides for the inclusion of two "eminent persons" as Members of the NJAC is ultra vires the provisions of the Constitution, for a variety of reasons. The same has also been held as violative of the "basic structure" of the Constitution.

But fascinatingly, Justice Khehar admitted that all is not well even with the collegium system and this is the time to improve it. However, the Supreme Court invited the government to help the judiciary to improve and better the existing collegium system.

  • A three judges Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice J S Khehar upheld cancellation of admission of more than 300 candidates

Justice J. S. Khehar also headed a historic five judge Constitution bench in Nabam Rebia & Bamand Felix v. Bamang Felix Deputy Speaker & Others, [2016(8) SCC 1] that reinstated the Congress-led Arunachal Pradesh Government and held all the actions of the Governor violative of the Constitution. Alluding S. R. Bommai v. Union of India [(1994)3 SCC 1] Justice Khehar avowed that it had: "all the powers to put the clock back".

The Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice J S Khehar imposed an exemplary cost of Rs. 25 lakh on NGO Suraz India Trust for filing 64 frivolous cases in various high courts and also in the apex court and wasting the judicial time. (Decided on 1 May 2017).

Justice J S Khehar in State of Punjab vs. Jagjit Singh (Decided on 26 October 2016) gave a significant verdict holding that the principal of 'equal pay for equal work' has to be made applicable to those engaged as daily wagers, casual and contractual employees who perform the same duties as the regulars.

Justice J S Khehar was also a part of the bench which sent Sahara Chief Subrata Roy to jail while hearing the matter relating to the refund of money invested by people in his two companies.

Heading a three-judge bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court Justice Khehar decided a case involving definition of a Sikh. He held that religion must be perceived as it is, and not as another would like it to be.[7]

Right to Privacy verdict

Right to Privacy verdict officially known as Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India, in which a nine-judge bench including Justice Khehar held that the right to privacy is protected as a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.[8]

2G spectrum case

As an aftermath of Supreme Court's landmark decision in the 2G spectrum case, Govt of India filed a Presidential reference before the Supreme Court. Justice Khehar gave a separate concurring opinion in which he warned that the government should not be under erroneous impression that it is not necessary to allocate natural resources through auction.[9]

No part of the natural resource can be dissipated as a matter of largess, charity, donation or endowment, for private exploitation. Each bit of natural resource expended must bring back a reciprocal consideration.

— Justice J. S. Khehar, Supreme Court of India, [9]

Triple talaq case

Justice Khehar was one of the judges on multi-faith bench that heard the controversial Triple Talaq case in 2017.[10][11] Though Khehar upheld the practice of validity of Triple Talaq (Talaq-e-Biddat),[12] it was barred by the bench by 3:2 majority and asked the Central government to bring legislation in six months to govern marriage and divorce in the Muslim community.[13][14] The court said till the government formulates a law regarding triple talaq, there would be an injunction on husbands pronouncing triple talaq on their wives.[15][16]

Discover more about Notable judgements related topics

Government of Arunachal Pradesh

Government of Arunachal Pradesh

The Government of Arunachal Pradesh also known as the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh, or locally as State Government, is the governing body of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh and its 25 districts. It consists of an executive, led by the Governor of Arunachal Pradesh, a judiciary and a legislative branch.

S. R. Bommai v. Union of India

S. R. Bommai v. Union of India

S. R. Bommai v. Union of India is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India, where the Court discussed at length provisions of Article 356 of the Constitution of India and related issues. This case had huge impact on Centre-State Relations. The judgement attempted to curb blatant misuse of Article 356 of the Constitution of India, which allowed President's rule to be imposed over state governments. S. R. Bommai, former Chief Minister of Karnataka, is widely remembered as the champion for this landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of India, considered one of the most quoted verdicts in the country's political history.

Sahara India Pariwar

Sahara India Pariwar

Sahara India Pariwar is an Indian conglomerate headquartered in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. The group operates business sectors such as finance, infrastructure & housing, real estate, sports, power, manufacturing, media & entertainment, health care, life insurance, educational institute, offline online education (edunguru), retail, E-commerce, electrical vehicle, hospital, artificial intelligence, hospitality, and co-operative society. The group has been a major promoter of sports in India and was the title sponsor of the Indian national cricket team, Indian national hockey team and Bangladesh national cricket team, Force India Formula One team among many other sports.

Subrata Roy

Subrata Roy

Subrata Roy is an Indian businessman who founded Sahara India Pariwar in 1978.

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court is the common High Court for the Indian states of Punjab and Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh based in Chandigarh, India. Sanctioned strength of Judges of this High Court is 85 consisting of 64 Permanent Judges and 21 Additional Judges including Chief Justice. As of 16th August 2022, there are 57 Judges working in the High Court, comprising 40 Permanent and 17 Additional Judges.

Right to Privacy verdict

Right to Privacy verdict

Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. vs Union Of India & Ors. (2017), also known as Right to Privacy verdict is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India, which holds that the right to privacy is protected as a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

List of landmark court decisions in India

List of landmark court decisions in India

Landmark court decisions in India substantially change the interpretation of existing law. Such a landmark decision may settle the law in more than one way. In present-day common law legal systems it may do so by:Establishing a significant new legal principle or concept; Overturning prior precedent based on its negative effects or flaws in its reasoning; Distinguishing a new principle that refines a prior principle, thus departing from prior practice without violating the rule of stare decisis; Establishing a "test".

Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court of India is the supreme judicial authority of India and is the highest court of the Republic of India under the constitution. It is the most senior constitutional court, has the final decision in all legal matters except for personal laws, and also has the power of judicial review. The Chief Justice of India is the Head and Chief Judge of the Supreme Court, which consists of a maximum of 34 judges, and has extensive powers in the form of original, appellate and advisory jurisdictions. New judges here are uniquely nominated by existing judges and other branches of government have neglible say.

Constitution of India

Constitution of India

The Constitution of India is the supreme law of India. The document lays down the framework that demarcates fundamental political code, structure, procedures, powers, and duties of government institutions and sets out fundamental rights, directive principles, and the duties of citizens. It is the longest written national constitution in the world.

2G spectrum case

2G spectrum case

The 2G spectrum case was a political controversy in which politicians and private officials of the United Progressive Alliance coalition government India were involved in selling or allotting 122 2G spectrum licenses on conditions that provided an advantage to specific telecom operators. A. Raja, then Telecom Minister, was accused of selling 2G spectrum licenses at a very low cost which resulted in the loss of ₹1,760 billion in government revenue. Raja was also accused of not following rules and regulations as well as not recognizing any advice from the Ministries of Finance and Law and Justice of India while allotting 2G spectrum licenses to telecom operators. Series of allegations were made on allotting 2G spectrum licenses including allegations from Central Bureau of Investigation after investigating the case alleging Raja for intentionally advancing the cut-off date to favour some specific firms, which were allegedly ineligible for applying for telecom licenses, in return for bribes.

Concurring opinion

Concurring opinion

In law, a concurring opinion is in certain legal systems a written opinion by one or more judges of a court which agrees with the decision made by the majority of the court, but states different reasons as the basis for their decision. When no absolute majority of the court can agree on the basis for deciding the case, the decision of the court may be contained in a number of concurring opinions, and the concurring opinion joined by the greatest number of judges is referred to as the plurality opinion.

Triple talaq in India

Triple talaq in India

Triple talaq and talaq-e-mughallazah are now banned means of Islamic divorce previously available to Muslims in India, especially adherents of Hanafi Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence. A Muslim man could legally divorce his wife by proclaiming three times consecutively the word talaq.

Allegations

In 2017, the Committee on Judicial Accountability published the suicide note written by former Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister, Kalikho Pul. In the note, Pul claimed that Khehar had demanded ₹49 crore (Para 15.22, Page 39) and ₹31 crore (Para 15.27, Page 41) in bribes from Pul for delivering a favourable verdict.[17] The Committee on Judicial Accountability has demanded a probe in the matter.[18]

Source: "Jagdish Singh Khehar", Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, (2022, November 25th), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdish_Singh_Khehar.

Enjoying Wikiz?

Enjoying Wikiz?

Get our FREE extension now!

References
  1. ^ "Jagdish Singh Khehar - Profile". 2018 Privacy Conference. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
  2. ^ a b "Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar - Profile". Supreme Court of India. Archived from the original on 13 November 2012. Retrieved 27 September 2012.
  3. ^ "J S Khehar may become 1st Sikh Chief Justice of India in 2017". Day & Night News. 1 September 2011. Archived from the original on 21 May 2014.
  4. ^ "Chief Justice J.S. Khehar ends his eventful tenure with a bang".
  5. ^ "Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar had defined who is a Sikh". The Times of India.
  6. ^ "Justice J.S. Khehar appointed as 44th Chief Justice of India". The Hindu. 19 December 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  7. ^ "Justice Khehar had defined Sikh identity". The Times of India. 12 September 2011. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  8. ^ Bhandari, Vrinda; Kak, Amba; Parsheera, Smriti; Rahman, Faiza. "An Analysis of Puttaswamy: The Supreme Court's Privacy Verdict". IndraStra Global. 003: 004. ISSN 2381-3652.
  9. ^ a b "Natural resources cannot be dissipated as charity: SC judge". First Post. 27 September 2012. Retrieved 25 March 2013.
  10. ^ "Triple talaq case: Muslim judge on multi-faith bench kept mum all through". The Times of India.
  11. ^ "5 Judges Of 5 Faiths Give Verdict On Triple Talaq".
  12. ^ "Triple talaq verdict has not gone the entire distance".
  13. ^ "Supreme Court declares triple talaq unconstitutional, strikes it down by 3:2 majority". The Times of India.
  14. ^ "Five Supreme Court judges who passed the verdict on triple talaq".
  15. ^ "Injunction on husbands pronouncing triple talaq until law is made: SC advocate".
  16. ^ "This Is What Supreme Court Said In Triple Talaq Judgment [Read Judgment]". 22 August 2017.
  17. ^ "Former CM Kalikho Pul's suicide note" (PDF).
  18. ^ "CJAR covering note along with Mr. Kalikho Pul, former Arunachal Pradesh CM's complete suicide note (without redactions) – Campaign for Judicial Accountability & Judicial Reforms". judicialreforms.org. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
Legal offices
Preceded by Chief Justice of India
4 January 2017 - 27 August 2017
Succeeded by

The content of this page is based on the Wikipedia article written by contributors..
The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Licence & the media files are available under their respective licenses; additional terms may apply.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization & is not affiliated to WikiZ.com.