President Droupadi Murmu cleared the appointments of three judges to the Supreme Court of India a week after the collegium’s recommendation. Justice Sunita Agarwal, Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court; Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court; and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh, Chief Justice of the Telangana High Court will be sworn in on Tuesday, 6 October. Their elevation brings the strength of the apex court to 37 judges, with one vacancy still remaining. The number of women on the bench rises to three, while 34 men continue to serve.
Background and seniority dispute
The collegium’s recommendation, announced on 28 September, reignited long‑standing concerns about the criteria used to supersede senior judges and the opacity of the selection process. Agarwal, Upadhyaya and Singh are ranked fourth, fifth and sixth respectively on the all‑India seniority list, thereby bypassing the three most senior judges. None of the three is in line to become Chief Justice of India.
A separate report by The Leaflet noted that Justice Shree Chandrashekhar, appointed to the Supreme Court on 2 June, was junior to Justice Singh when the latter was passed over in June. With Singh’s elevation, he will now join the Supreme Court as a junior to Justice Chandrashekhar, a reversal that the collegium did not explain.
The collegium, which comprises the country’s senior judges, did not provide reasons for selecting the three candidates, leaving legal analysts and bar associations to question the consistency of the seniority‑based convention that has guided appointments for decades.
Profiles of the new appointees
Justice Sunita Agarwal was born in 1966 and began her legal career as an advocate at the Allahabad High Court. She was appointed a judge of that court in November 2011. In July 2023, the collegium led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud elevated her to Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court, making her the second woman to head the court.
Her tenure in Gujarat has been marked by several high‑profile interventions. In February 2025, the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Association passed a resolution calling for her transfer, citing concerns over “judicial independence” and roster changes. The Law Ministry responded by appointing Justice Biren Aniruddh Vaishnav as Acting Chief Justice while Justice Agarwal took a two‑week leave.
On 29 September, a day after the collegium’s recommendation, Justice Agarwal led a bench that dismissed former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s appeal against a 2023 Gujarat High Court order concerning the disclosure of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s educational degrees. The court upheld a fine of ₹25,000 imposed on Kejriwal, finding no larger public interest to justify disclosure under the Right to Information Act.
Justice Agarwal has also taken suo motu cognizance of matters of public concern. In September 2023, following a report on alleged sexual harassment of two students at Gujarat National Law University, her bench criticized the university’s initial response and noted an “overt anxious effort” by the registrar to dilute the issue. A high‑level committee, including a former Supreme Court judge and the Attorney General of India, was later constituted to review the university’s performance.
Another suo motu action involved the tragic Harni Lake boat accident in January 2024, which claimed the lives of 12 schoolchildren and two teachers. The bench repeatedly questioned the Vadodara Municipal Corporation’s supervision of the contractor and, in June 2024, found two former municipal commissioners prima facie guilty of dereliction of duty.
Justice Agarwal also presided over a case stemming from a 2022 Gujarat government resolution to introduce the Bhagavad Gita’s values, principles and prayers into the school curriculum for classes 6‑12. While petitioners argued that the move violated the secular spirit of the National Education Policy and Article 28 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court declined to intervene, leaving the matter to the Gujarat High Court. In recent hearings, Justice Agarwal’s bench described the petition as “propaganda” and a “stunt,” suggesting that teaching the Gita could be framed as moral science rather than religious instruction.
Before her transfer to Gujarat, Justice Agarwal was part of a seven‑judge Allahabad High Court bench that, in 2023, framed contempt charges against seven office‑bearers of the Kanpur Bar Association for continuing a strike deemed “illegal and paralysing judicial work.” Earlier, in 2021, a bench she sat on with Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) quashed habeas corpus orders against six anti‑CAA‑NRC protesters detained under the National Security Act, criticizing the administration for relying on vague and non‑existent grounds.
Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, 61, also hails from the Allahabad High Court, where he began practising in 1991 and was appointed a judge in 2011 alongside Justice Agarwal. He became Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court in 2023 and was transferred to the Delhi High Court as Chief Justice in January 2025, making him the second judge from the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court to reach the Supreme Court.
As Chief Justice of Delhi, Justice Upadhyaya played a pivotal role in the controversy surrounding Justice Yashwant Varma in March 2025, after burnt and unaccounted cash was discovered at Varma’s official residence. Upadhyaya ordered an in‑house inquiry, gathered evidence and submitted a report to then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna. The preliminary report indicated that four to five semi‑burnt stacks of Indian currency notes were found in a storeroom or outhouse.
Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh serves as Chief Justice of the Telangana High Court. Ranked sixth in the national seniority list, his elevation superseded three judges senior to him, echoing the seniority‑bypass controversy that surrounded his appointment. At the time of his elevation, Justice Singh was junior to Justice Shree Chandrashekhar, who had joined the Supreme Court in June. With Singh’s appointment, he will now sit on the bench as a junior to Justice Chandrashekhar, a reversal that has not been publicly explained.
While the new judges have not yet delivered judgments at the Supreme Court, their prior records suggest a mix of administrative assertiveness, suo motu activism and involvement in politically sensitive cases. Their appointments also raise broader questions about the collegium’s transparency, the role of seniority in judicial promotions, and the growing presence of women on India’s highest court.
Be First to Comment