A Jurimetric and Constitutional Legacy

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) is the highest-ranking officer of the Indian Judiciary. As per the Memorandum of Process of appointment of Supreme Court docket Judges, the outgoing CJI would suggest to the Union Minister of Regulation, Justice and Firm Affairs, the senior most Decide of the Supreme Court docket thought-about match to carry the workplace for the appointment as the following CJI. The Minster of Regulation, Justice and Firm affairs would then put up the advice to the Prime Minister (PM) who then suggested the President within the matter of Appointment of the following CJI.

After the sudden demise of the 1^st CJI Sir Harilal Jekisondas Kania on 06-11-1951, the query of appointment of the two^nd CJI arose. Upon the request of the 1^st Legal professional Common M C Setalvad, the then Prime Minister was agreeable to nominate Justice M C Chagla as the two^nd CJI. Nonetheless, the sitting judges of the Supreme Court docket threatened to resign if the seniority rule was not adopted and resultantly, Justice Patanjali Shastri turned the two^nd CJI. That’s how the conference of the senior most Supreme Court docket choose turning into the Chief Justice of India got here to be firmly established. Earlier, through the existence of the Federal Court docket of India, the stated conference was not adopted as judges of Indian origin had been outdated by the British Authorities.

The stated conference has thereafter been continued all all through besides for 3 events. In 1963, when Justice Syed Jafar Imam was made to resign on account of his debilitating sickness, Justice P.B. Gajendragadkar turned the seventh Chief Justice of India. Later in 1973, Justice A.N. Ray outdated Justice J.M. Shelat, Justice Okay.S. Hegde and Justice A.N. Grover and have become the 14th Chief Justice of India after the pronouncement of Kesavananda Bharti judgment and upon retirement of J S M Sikri. Lastly, in 1977, Justice M.H. Beg outdated Justice H.R. Khanna and have become the fifteenth Chief Justice of India. One other supersession which was prevented was that of J C Shah.J. The Authorities was contemplating superseding Justice Shah for his majority judgments in Rustom Cavasjee Cooper case ^{and Privy Purse case. Abhinav Chandrachud in his ebook ‘Supreme Whispers’ mentions about this incident and states that Justice Hidayatullah went to the PM and stated that if Justice Shah had been outdated, all of the Judges (besides one) of the Supreme Court docket would resign. The one who was not able to resign was Justice A.N. Ray, Abhinav Chandrachud states.}

This text makes an attempt to empirically analyse the tenure, judgment authorship, and constitutional bench participation of the CJI primarily based on publicly accessible databases like e-SCR and different reviews. The target is to attract significant conclusions about developments in judicial productiveness, bench power utilisation, and the evolving function of CJIs in constitutional governance.

Attention-grabbing details and figures:

Some fascinating details, figures and numbers of the 50 CJIs are supplied primarily based on their tenure as Judges of the Supreme Court docket of India, their tenure as CJI and their participation in numerous benches of various strengths. Though this can be very tough to say all of their achievements, we will have a glimpse by way of numbers. One can think about the big quantity of labor that goes in other than different administrative work that they’ve to hold out being the CJI. The accuracy of the information relies on the accuracy of the e-SCR information.

I’ve compiled the information of reported judgements of all of the CJIs throughout their tenures as CJIs in addition to their whole tenures as judges of the Supreme Court docket of India. The variety of judgements authored by them and the Constitutional Benches that they had been a part of are additionally talked about to offer an fascinating evaluation on the CJIs.

The information reveals fascinating details together with the truth that Justice P N Bhagwati served the longest as a choose of the Supreme Court docket of India, for 13 years and 156 days. Nonetheless the longest serving Chief Justice of India is Justice Y V Chandrachud with a tenure of seven years and 139 days because the CJI out of his whole tenure of 12 years and 317 days as Decide of the Supreme Court docket of India. The Second longest serving CJI was J B P Sinha who served for 4 years and 122 days adopted by A N Ray.J for 3 years and 276 days and S R Das for 3 years and 241 days. The shortest tenure as CJI was that of Okay N Singh.J who served as CJI just for 17 days adopted by Rajendra Babu.J whose tenure was 29 days after which J C Shah.J who served for 35 days.

D Y Chandrachud.J emerged as the highest contributor by quantity of authored Judgments within the Supreme Court docket, having authored 852 out of 1,284 reported judgements throughout his tenure of 8 years and 181 days. The file of getting the very best reported Judgments goes to J C Shah.J having authored 1537 reported judgments. Nonetheless, he stands 2^nd having authored 729 judgments in his tenure as choose of the Supreme Court docket for 11 years and 42 days. With regard to having the very best authored judgments within the historical past of Supreme Courts world wide, the file is held by Arijit Pasayat.J who has authored 2202 judgements all through his tenure of seven years and 200 days as a Decide of the Supreme Court docket. He was known as the ‘Sachin Tendulkar of the Supreme Court docket Of India’ on account of his constant and high-volume contribution to Indian Jurisprudence. Subsequent is Justice Kurian Joseph who has authored 1147 judgements in his tenure of 5 years and 265 days as Decide of the Supreme Court docket adopted by G B Patnaik.J with 1037 Judgments authored by him throughout his tenure of seven years and 39 days as Decide of the Supreme Court docket of India. Fourth in line is Okay N Wanchoo.J who has authored 1007 Judgments in his tenure of 9 years and 108 days as choose of the Supreme Court docket of India and 5^th is P B Gajendragadkar.J with 978 Judgments in his tenure of 9 years and 57 days.

Justice Okay N Wanchoo has the excellence of being part of 556 5 choose benches, which is the very best for any Supreme Court docket choose. Moreover, he served because the CJI with out having any legislation diploma as he was an ICS officer. He was appointed as a Excessive Court docket choose after which elevated to the Supreme Court docket of India. The following is Justice P B Gajendragadkar who has been a part of 520 5 choose benches. Justice Wanchoo additionally has the distinctive distinction of being the one ICS officer and the one non-lawyer to carry the very best judicial workplace within the land. The chart of the highest 10 CJIs by reported Judgments is produced under:

The Annual Productiveness of Chief Justices calculated primarily based on the reported judgments per 12 months of their tenure is provided under the place D Y Chandrachud.J leads with 151.2 reported judgments per 12 months in his tenure of 8 years and 181 days, adopted by G B Pattanaik.J with 145.9 reported Judgments per 12 months in his tenure of seven years and 39 days adopted by P Sathasivam.J, J C Shah.J, Okay N Wanchoo.J, P B Gajendragadkar.J and so forth.

The High 10 CJIs by whole Structure Bench participation embrace Okay N Wanchoo.J who has been a part of 585 Choices of 5 choose and above, adopted by P B Gajendragadkar.J with 541 selections and the three^rd being J C Shah.J with 529 selections and M Hidayatullah.J with 529 selections. The chart indicating the highest 10 CJIs by Structure Bench participation is given under.

The typical CJI tenure of all of the 50 CJIs involves 1 12 months and 218 days whereas their common Supreme Court docket tenure comes to eight years and 190 days. There are solely 5 CJIs in 75 years having a tenure of greater than 3 years as CJI.

J C Shah.J has the excellence of being the a part of three 11-judge bench selections. Whereas S M Sikri.J, Okay Subba Rao.J, M Hidayatullah.J and Okay N Wanchoo.J have been a part of 11 choose benches twice. D Y Chandrachud.J has been a part of 5 9-Decide bench selections adopted by J C Shah.J who was a part of 4 9-judge bench selections. D.Y. Chandrachud.J additionally has been a part of one 8-Decide bench resolution, six 7-Decide Bench selections, thirty six 5-Decide Bench selections and 371 3-Decide Bench selections. J C Shah.J has been a part of numerous Constitutional Benches which incorporates three 8-Decide Bench selections, twelve 7-Decide Bench selections, twenty-six 6-Decide Bench selections, 481 5-Decide Bench selections, thirty 4-Decide Bench selections and 812 3-Decide Bench selections.

As per the e-SCR web site, Supreme Court docket has reported 37,300 judgements together with one 13-judge bench resolution, 5 11-judge Bench selections, fifteen 9-judge bench selections, 4 8-judge bench selections, eighty-two 7-judge bench selections, fifty-five 6-judge Bench selections, 1950 5- choose bench selections, 305 4-judge bench selections, 7686 3-judge bench selections, 25858 2-judge bench selections and 85 single Decide selections until date.

Bigger Benches of the SCI (13, 11, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5 Decide Benches):

Bigger Benches are constituted to resolve substantial questions of Constitutional legislation as per Article 145 of the Structure of India. The inquiries to be determined by the Structure Benches have large ramification upon the governance of the Nation together with the interpretation of Elementary Rights, independence of judiciary, federal construction of the States, proper of minorities and so forth. Usually, the bigger Benches are constituted to both resolve lengthy standing Constitutional ambiguities or to resolve on differing views of benches of equal power, for overruling earlier Constitutional Bench selections or for deciphering questions relating to Elementary Rights and the bounds of State Energy and for deciding Presidential Reference underneath Artwork 143 of the Structure of India. From 1950 until 2025, 171 judgments have been delivered by the Supreme Court docket of India relating to numerous vital questions. These judgements have been delivered by the Apex Court docket with power of greater than 5 Decide Benches together with one 13-Decide Bench resolution, 5 11-Decide Bench selections, eighteen 9-Decide Bench selections, 5 8-Decide Bench selections, eighty-five 7-Decide Bench selections and fifty-seven 6-Decide Bench selections. The Supreme Court docket of India has delivered 1971 5-Decide Bench selections in a span of 75 years which makes the 5-Decide Structure Bench essentially the most used Structure Bench to resolve substantial questions of Constitutional Regulation. The Bench clever break-up is given under:

13-Decide Bench:

The 13-judge bench resolution is without doubt one of the largest benches, having heard the longest arguments spanning 68 days over 5 months, protecting the widest space of legislation and authorized literature ensuing into 703-page judgment with 11 opinions within the matter of Kesavanand Bharati versus State of Kerala & ors^{. The core query other than the validity of the 24th, 25th, 26th and 29th Constitutional Amendments within the stated case was “Did the Parliament have limitless energy to amend the structure or are there any implied Limitations on such amending energy?” The bulk Judgement by 7 judges of the 13 Decide bench overruled the 11 choose bench resolution within the matter of L C Golaknath Vs. State of Punjab, upholding the validity of the 24th, 25th and 29th Constitutional Modification and declaring the final a part of Artwork 31-C as invalid. It laid down the well-known Doctrine of Primary Construction by which the Parliament’s energy to amend any a part of the Structure was curtailed because it held that the modification to the Structure can not alter the important options or the Primary Construction of the Structure.}

11-Decide Bench:

The Bigger Bench consisting 11 Judges has been constituted solely 5 instances from 1950 until date to resolve vital questions of Constitutional legislation, the 1^st in 1961 and the 5^th in 2002. An 11-judge bench is uncommon, convened just for circumstances of extraordinary constitutional significance. The primary 11-Decide bench to have been constituted within the Supreme Court docket of India was within the matter of Kathi Kalu Oghad versus state of Bombay^{, whereby 11 Judges of the Supreme Court docket sat collectively to resolve the scope and ambit of the safety granted underneath article 20(3) of the Structure of India, relating to testimonial compulsion and whether or not acquiring specimen writing and signature from the accused contravened the elemental proper of remaining silent assured underneath article 20(3) of the Structure.}

The two^nd 11-Decide bench resolution was delivered by the Supreme Court docket within the matter of I C Golak Nath versus State of Punjab and others^{. The Supreme Court docket in Golaknath was contemplating the correctness of the choices within the matter of Shankari Prasad and Sajjan Singh, whereby the Supreme Court docket had held that the phrase “legislation” in article 13 doesn’t embrace an modification to the structure. The Supreme Court docket by razor-thin majority of 6:5 held that the phrase “legislation” underneath article 13 would come with an modification to the structure and subsequently any constitutional modification handed by the Parliament underneath article 368 couldn’t abridge any elementary rights assured by the Structure. It’s due to this judgment that the biggest bench of 13 judges was constituted and this Judgment got here to be overruled by the landmark Kesavanda Bharti judgment.}

The three^rd 11-Decide bench was constituted to resolve the validity of The Banking Firms (Acquisition and Switch of Enterprise) Act, 1969 often known as the Financial institution Nationalisation which was challenged by R C Cooper who was the shareholder of one of many banks that got here to be nationalised. The 11-Decide bench held that the Act didn’t present for ample compensation and subsequently struck down the coverage of financial institution nationalisation as being in violation of the elemental rights^{. This judgment performed a big function in creating Constitutional legislation because it overruled the A Okay Gopalan judgment which interpreted the Elementary rights in restrictive method and the identical judgment marked the way in which for the event of the elemental rights jurisprudence.}

The 4^th 11-judge bench resolution of the Supreme Court docket is within the matter of H H Maha Rajadhi Raja Vs Union of India ^{often known as the “Privy Purse case” which challenged the Presidential Orders derecognizing the rulers and thereby ending the privy purse paid to 565 rulers of princely states in India which was a solemn assure underneath Article 293 of the Structure of India. The 11-judge bench of the Supreme Court docket by majority of 10:1 held the presidential order to be unlawful. It’s a important judgment as the bulk affirmed the rule of legislation and established the Constitutional supremacy over the political will of the Robust Authorities.}

The 5^th 11-Decide bench resolution of the Supreme Court docket of India is within the matter of TMA pai basis Vs State of Karnataka and others ^{wherein the scope of proper of minorities to ascertain and administer instructional establishments of their selection underneath Article 30(1) learn with Article 29(2) of the Structure was determined. This judgment had a big impact on Training Regulation and by advantage of this judgment, the Supreme Court docket established that advantage and excellence in instructional establishments can’t be sacrificed.}

9-Decide Bench:

The 18 Landmark 9-Decide bench selections of the Supreme Court docket of India embrace the Property Homeowners Affiliation & Ors Vs. State of Maharashtra ^{which handled the problem of whether or not privately owned properties are coated underneath “Materials Assets of the Neighborhood” underneath Artwork 39(b) of the Structure of India. On this case, it was held by majority that not all privately owned property qualifies as “materials assets of the Neighborhood”. Then Proper to Privateness judgment was delivered by the Supreme Court docket of India in Okay S Puttaswamy Vs UOI, then Second and Third Judges case, whereby the Supreme Court docket of India was coping with the appointment of Supreme Court docket Judges and Excessive Court docket Judges. The Supreme Court docket of India established the Judicial Primacy in appointments and transfers to the upper judiciary and to uphold the independence of Judiciary. Later in 1992, the 9-Decide Bench delivered the landmark judgment in Indra Sawhney Vs UOI which arose from the implementation of the Mandal Fee report recommending 27% reservation for OBC in public employment. The Majority upheld the 27% reservation. Nonetheless the idea of Creamy Layer was launched together with the 50% ceiling rule which lays down that whole reservation can not exceed 50%.}

In 2024, the Supreme Court docket of India delivered three 9-judge bench selections. D Y Chandrachud.J is a part of all of the three current 9 Decide Bench selections which is the very best amongst all CJIs. The last decade clever chart of 9-Decide Bench selections is produced under:

8-Decide Bench:

There are solely 5 8-Decide Bench selections delivered by the Supreme Court docket of India until date, the primary being in 1954 within the matter of M P Sharma & Ors Vs Satish Chandra ^{and the final in 2024 in Mineral Space Growth Authority & Anr Vs M/s Metal Authority of India & Anr (II). That is fairly uncommon because the Structure Benches usually have an odd variety of Judges to make sure that there’s a clear majority of opinions. Nonetheless, there are 5 Judgments having the power of 8-Judges within the historical past of the Supreme Court docket of India.}

The 1^st 8-Decide Bench resolution in M P Sharma in 1954 handled the problem of willpower of whether or not the Proper to Privateness is part of Elementary Rights and whether or not it’s protected underneath the Structure. The Supreme Court docket of India in 1954 held that proper to privateness just isn’t explicitly assured underneath the Structure and subsequently just isn’t part of Elementary rights. This 8 Decide Bench resolution was overruled in 2017 by a 9 Decide bench resolution of the Supreme Court docket of India in Justice Okay S Puttaswamy Vs UOI ^{which acknowledged the proper to privateness as a elementary proper underneath Artwork 14, 19 and 21 of the Structure.}

The two^nd 8-Decide Bench resolution is within the Presidential Reference underneath Artwork 143(1) in Re Berubari Union and Trade of Enclaves ^{in 1960. It’s a landmark resolution relating to the Constitutional implications of ceding territory. The bulk held that Parliament alone can not cede Indian territory to a different Nation and the trade or cessation of the Indian territory could be finished solely by means of a Constitutional Modification underneath Artwork 368 of the Structure of India.}

The three^rd 8-Decide Bench resolution was within the matter of Pandit M S M Sharma Vs Dr Shree Krishna & ors ^{whereby the Supreme Court docket of India was requested to resolve on the battle between elementary proper underneath Artwork 19(1)(a) i.e., freedom of speech and expression and Legislative privileges of State legislature underneath Artwork 194(3) of the Connstitution of India. The Majority of 6:2 held that Artwork 194(3) confers absolute privileges on State Legislature and these should not topic to elementary rights. It’s the foundational case on the scope of legislative privileges in Indian Constitutional legislation.}

The 4^th 8-Decide resolution is within the matter of Keshavlal Jethalal Shah Vs Mohanlal Bhagwandas & Anr ^{the place the Supreme Court docket examined whether or not the Gujarat Modification Act, 1965, which amended Part 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Lodge and Lodging Home Charges Management Act, 1947, may very well be utilized retrospectively to a revision petition that was already pending earlier than the Excessive Court docket. The Supreme Court docket concluded that until the modification explicitly states its retrospective utility, it shouldn’t be presumed to have such an impact. This judgment has important implications for the interpretation of legislative amendments and their utility to ongoing and concluded circumstances.}

The 5^th 8-Decide bench resolution is within the matter of Mineral Space Growth Authority & Anr Vs M/s Metal Authority of India & Anr (II) the place the Court docket was known as upon to resolve whether or not the 9 Decide bench judgment in Mineral Space Growth & Anr ^{may very well be given potential impact.}

7-Decide Bench:

There are 85 Seven Decide bench selections delivered by the Supreme Court docket of India which embrace the landmark selections just like the Particular Reference No 1 of 1964 regarding Separation of Powers and the Privileges of Home of Commons conferred on State Legislatures when Legislative Meeting of State of UP dedicated Keshav Singh to jail for its contempt and the State Meeting additional directed the Excessive Court docket judges who handed orders in habeas corpus petition on behalf of Keshav Singh, to be introduced earlier than it for its contempt. This led to a severe battle between the Constitutional Establishments. The total bench consisting of 28 Judges of Allahabad Excessive Court docket sat collectively to resolve the petitions filed by 2 Excessive Court docket judges. That is the biggest bench to resolve within the Nation until date. Furthermore, there are judgments like Madhu Limaye Vs Sub-Divisional Justice of the Peace, State of Kerala vs N M Thomas, Maneka Gandhi Vs UOI, S. P Gupta & Ors Vs UOI referred to as the 1^st Judges Case, L Chandra Kumar Vs UOI the place Supreme Court docket reiterated that jurisdiction conferred upon Excessive Court docket underneath Articles 226 & 227 and Supreme Court docket underneath Article 32 is a part of the inviolable fundamental construction of the Structure. It was additional held that judicial evaluate by Excessive Court docket and Supreme Court docket can’t be ousted or excluded even by the Parliament or State Legislature. The bigger bench selections characterize the Supreme Court docket’s dedication to the Structure and the Constitutional Targets and Constitutional Morality which has been preserved and carried ahead by way of its inventive interpretation.

The chart signifies that the Nineteen Seventies noticed the very best variety of circumstances determined by 7-Decide bench of the Supreme Court docket of India which is 33 Judgments in a span of 10 years. 69% of all of the 7-Decide bench selections had been delivered within the first three a long time which reveals that the Supreme Court docket judges through the early life made the muse on interpretation of the Structure for the long run bigger benches.

5-Decide Bench:

5-Decide Benches are the Workhorse for the Structure Bench circumstances. There may be not a single 12 months the place Supreme Court docket of India has not delivered 5-Decide Bench selections. From 1950, yearly on common, the Supreme Court docket of India has delivered twenty-six 5-Decide Bench selections. The best has been within the 12 months 1962 when Supreme Court docket of India delivered 180 5-Decide Bench selections and the bottom being 2009 when only one judgment was delivered by the 5 Decide Bench. Within the 1960’s, the Supreme Court docket delivered 939 5-Decide Bench selections which is the very best from 1950’s until date. The primary 2 a long time (1950-70) contributed to 40% of the whole 5 Decide Bench selections. The early life had been the height years because the Supreme Court docket was laying down the foundational ideas in constitutional legislation, civil liberties, property rights, prison legislation and so forth. The development of division benches and three Decide benches to sort out the backlog of circumstances started within the Nineteen Eighties. There’s a revival of 5 Decide Benches being shaped within the present decade which suggests the necessity for a everlasting 5 Decide Bench to resolve vital circumstances.

As per Artwork 145(3), the minimal variety of judges to resolve substantial questions of Constitutional Regulation needs to be 5. So, 5 Decide Benches are constitutionally mandated for interpretation of vital questions. Many Constitutional doctrines have been developed or affirmed by the 5 Decide Bench selections. For example, a few of the current 5 Decide Bench circumstances are: 1) Tej Prakash Pathak & Ors Vs Rajasthan Excessive Court docket^{, whereby the 5 Decide Bench held that the Guidelines of the Sport can’t be altered after graduation of the Recruitment course of; 2) In Affiliation for Democratic Reforms Vs UOI, the 5 Decide Bench unanimously declared the Electoral Bond Scheme unconstitutional; 3) InjRe: Article 370 of the Structure judgment, the Supreme Court docket of India unanimously upheld the Union Governments 2019 resolution to abrogate Article 370 of the Structure of India; 4) In Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs UOI the Supreme Court docket was coping with the Similar Intercourse Marriage subject and the Supreme Court docket of India held that the legalization of similar intercourse marriage falls inside the legislative area and isn’t inside the purview of the Judiciary to resolve; 5) In Anoop Baranwal Vs UOI the Supreme Court docket was coping with the independence and impartiality of the Election Fee of India and directed that till the parliament enacts a legislation as per Artwork 324(2), the appointment of the ECI shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the Committee comprising the PM, the Chief of Opposition and the CJI; 6) In Joseph Shine Vs UOI, the 5 Decide Bench unanimously held that Part 497 of IPC is unconstitutional because it violates Artwork 14, 15 and 21 of the Structure of India. The Provision was held to be arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of the dignity of girls;7) In Frequent Trigger Vs UOI,e the Supreme Court docket was coping with the Proper of the individual to die with dignity and it was held that proper to life contains proper to die with dignity and the Supreme Court docket permitted passive euthanasia underneath strict situations; 8) In Janhit Abhiyan Vs UOI, the Supreme Court docket was coping with the validity of 103rd Constitutional Modification Act, 2019 offering 10% reservation in public employment and academic establishments for EWSThe Majority of three:2 upheld the validity of the modification and permitted the ten% EWS reservation; 9)In M Siddiq Vs Mahant Suresh Das & Ors, the Ram Janmabhoomi case, the 5 Judges unanimously awarded the complete disputed land to the deity Ram Lalla Virajman, recognizing the assumption of Hindus that the positioning is the birthplace of Lord Ram;10) In Navtej Singh Johar Vs UOI, the 5 Decide Bench was coping with the Constitutionality of Part 377 of the IPC, whereby the 5 Judges unanimously held that Part 377 is unconstitutional insofar because it criminalizes consensual intercourse between adults of similar intercourse, thereby decriminalizing homosexuality in India; 11)In Shayara Bano Vs UOI, the 5 Decide bench was coping with the constitutionality of triple talaq. The Majority of three:2 held that the observe of triple talaq is unconstitutional as it’s manifestly arbitrary and subsequently violative of Artwork 14 of the Structure of India; 12) In Supreme Court docket Advocate on file affiliation Vs UOI often known as the NJAC case, the validity of the 99th Constitutional Modification Act, 2014 and the NJAC Act, 2014 had been challenged and the bulk 4:1 held that the NJAC Act, 2014 and the Constitutional Modification Act, 2014 had been unconstitutional as they violated the essential construction of the Structure by compromising the independence of Judiciary.}

These are simply the few of the numerous landmark 5 Decide Bench selections of the Supreme Court docket of India. All these judgments have left a big impact on the governance of the Nation. It has bolstered the ideas of equity, boosted transparency, reaffirmed accountability of legislators, expanded the scope of Elementary Rights and considerably influenced public coverage, legislative motion and social reform. These Judgments show the judiciary’s evolving function in upholding Constitutional morality and balancing institutional energy.

Information of tenure of fifty CJIs together with their reported Judgments and the Benches they had been a part of is produced within the desk under:

Information of judgments reported and benches from eSCR and authored from Manupatra analytics for the 52 CJI’s

*Present CJI B R Gavai file as on 26^th June 2025, his time period ends on 23^rd November, 2025.

Over a time frame, the power of the bench has decreased on account of enhance in variety of circumstances being filed within the Supreme Court docket of India. From 2000 onwards, the choices of division bench have elevated by leaps and bounds. Almost 73% of all Supreme Court docket reported judgments have been delivered by 2-judge benches, reinforcing that almost all constitutional and statutory interpretation occurs by way of Division Benches. Over 21% of reported judgments had been delivered by 3-judge benches. The three Decide Bench selections typically reconcile conflicting two-judge Bench selections. The 5 Decide Bench selections represent round 5% of the whole reported Judgments.

The excellent jurimetrics evaluation of the Chief Justices of India (CJIs) from 1950 to 2025 gives perception into the evolution and functioning of the Supreme Court docket of India. 51 CJIs have guided the Supreme Court docket of India by way of instances of constitutional crises, historic interpretations, and judicial reforms through the course of the judiciary’s 75-year historical past. Every of the CJIs has performed a outstanding function in shaping the Indian Judiciary extra importantly by way of the variety of judgements they’ve written and which are reported, other than the vast majority of admitted but unreported judgments that they have determined of their tenure.

From the longest-serving CJI, Justice Y. V. Chandrachud, whose tenure mirrored judicial stability, to the one having served the shortest interval, Justice Okay. N. Singh, whose affect regardless of brevity is recorded, every tenure contributes uniquely to the legacy of Indian Judiciary. Judges like Justice J. C. Shah and Justice D. Y. Chandrachud have exhibited extraordinary bench participation, authorship and scholarship. Chandrachud.J has been instrumental in bringing expertise to the Indian Judiciary. He arrange the 1^st paperless Court docket within the Supreme Court docket of India. Sanjiv Khanna.J’s appointment because the CJI was nothing wanting poetic justice since his uncle H R Khanna.J was not made the CJI and was outdated regardless of being the senior most Supreme Court docket Decide in 1977.

Notably, the information on bigger benches establishes the Supreme Court docket’s pivotal function in resolving constitutional questions of far-reaching affect; from Kesavananda Bharati to the popularity of privateness as a elementary proper and rulings on electoral reforms, minority rights, and social justice and so forth., are just some of the wide-ranging Judgments with large affect on the governance of the Nation. The 5-judge benches’ contribution spotlight their vital perform because the workhorse of constitutional interpretation. This text serves as a small tribute to the contributions of the nation’s highest judicial officers.

Jeet J Bhatt is an Advocate training at Gujarat Excessive Court docket , views are private.