Supreme Court Gets Three New Judges
Yes. Supreme Court has got three new judges with Justices Sunita Agarwal, Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Aparesh Kumar Singh taking oath on October 6, 2026. All three judges were serving as Chief Justices of High Courts before their appointment to the Supreme Court. Justice Sunita Agarwal was then Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court, Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya then Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh then Chief Justice of the Telangana High Court.
The Supreme Court Collegium had recommended their names on 28 September, 2026. After they were appointed by the President as judges of Supreme Court, the process of their appointment was complete as per the Constitution. With the elevation, the working strength of the Supreme Court is now 37 judges as against the sanctioned strength of 38.
“The appointment of Justice Sunita Agarwal is also significant as she is now the third woman to be on the Supreme Court. The other two sitting women Judges are Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice V Mohana.
What Does Article 124 Say About Supreme Court Appointments?
The article which deals with the appointment of judge of Supreme Court Article 124 of the Constitution. Article 124 of the Indian Constitution states that: Every judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal.
Additionally, the Constitution mandates consultation with the Chief Justice of India and other judges as envisaged in Article 124. The current mode of appointment must be studied along with the original text of the Constitution to understand it fully. Supreme Court decisions have played a powerful role in shaping the concept of consultation.
Second and third Judges Cases – Collegium system: In the supreme Court’s views on Article 124 through second and third Judges Case to the derogation of the Collegium system: The Supreme Court appoints judges in the current system. Appointments to the supreme Court are made by the Supreme Court Collegium of the Chief Justice of India.
The Supreme Court itself has put up on its website the process of judicial appointments and materials, including the role of the High Court Collegia, State Governments, the Union Government and the Supreme Court Collegium.
Who Can Become a Supreme Court Judge?
Article 124 also specifies the constitutional qualification for appointment. A person must be citizen of India and should have fulfilled any one of the requirements.
The qualifications for appointment include: – a person shall be qualified for appointment if he/she has been for not less than five years a judge of a High Court or a person who has been an advocate of a High Court for ten years. The Constitution allows appointment of a person who, in opinion of President, is a distinguished jurist.
The three judges who were elevated to the Supreme Court all had considerable experience in the judicial system prior to their appointment. For each of the judges, appointment to the Supreme Court represented a promotion from being the Chief Justice of a High Court.
What Is the Collegium’s Function?
Article 124 of the Constitution does not name the Collegium specifically. It has derived its current role from judicial interpretation of the consultation requirement of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has also clarified that the terms referring to ‘consultation with the Chief Justice’ in the Second and Third Judges Cases assumed a meaning which included the aspect of sharing with the Legislators; this interpretation underpins the current appointment process.
In the current appointments, the Collegium deliberated and recommended the names of Justices Sunita Agarwal, Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Aparesh Kumar Singh on 28 th September. The Union Government then processed the recommendations and the President appointed the three judges.
Thus, the appointment process has both a constitutional and an institutional aspect to it. The Collegium recommends a judge; the Union Government considers this recommendation and the President appoints the judge formally.
Can the Government Reject a Collegium Recommendation?
The current system does not imply that the Union government has no say. The executive processes judicial appointments and has the option to ask for a review of a recommendation.
Despite this, the constitution and Supreme Court rulings have set important constraints on the power of the executive to influence judicial appointments, given that judicial independence is recognised as a component of the basic framework of the Constitution. The Supreme Court acknowledges the basic structure doctrine.
Thus the relationship between the judiciary and executive with regards to judicial appointments has continued to be vital constitutional matters. In 2015, the Supreme Court invalidated the framework of the National Judicial Appointments Commission that had intended to supersede the Collegium with a commission consisting of non-judiciary.
As a result, the existing process still functions through the Collegium structure shaped through judicial fiat with the Union Government having its Constitutionally mandated function within the process.
Why Is Appointment Process Important?
Judicial appointments have a clear relationship with the independence of the courts. The Justices of the Supreme Court handle challenges to the constitution, issues involving the State, conflicts over rights, appeals in criminal cases, commercial matters and issues over the meaning of the law.
Thus, the Constitution establishes eligibility criteria and some institutional constraints on becoming a judge. Supreme Court judges are generally required to retire at 65 and may be removed only through an arduous constitutional process involving the President and Parliament.
Finally, elevating three High Court Chief Justices serves a purpose beyond simply creating more judges on the Supreme Court. It is a practical example of how the appointment process works, from announcement by the Collegium to appointment by the President.
Interestingly, even as the Supreme Court has 37 judges (of the 38 sanctioned strength), the latest names have been decided upon when Parliament has just enhanced the maximum strength of the apex court from 34 to 38 judges.
