Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai, who was appointed to the bench of the Supreme Court in 2019 and became the 52nd Chief Justice of India on May 14, 2025, has made an indelible stamp on the Indian judiciary through a series of opinions that have had a significant impact.
Over the course of his tenure, Justice Gavai published or co-authored around three hundred judgments. A significant number of these judgments addressed fundamental issues of the Constitution and the rule of law.
The range of issues that he decides on includes economic policies, electoral transparency, individual liberty, social fairness, and restrictions on the power of the executive branch. The most important of these decisions is discussed in this essay, which also provides an in-depth analysis of the legacy that Justice Gavai leaves behind.
For More Updates & Regular Notes Join Our Whats App Group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators ) contact@legalmaestros.com.
Maintaining Economic Reform: The Demonetization of Currency
It was in the matter of demonetisation that Justice Gavai made one of his first and most prominent contributions to the field of constitutional jurisprudence.
In the case of Vivek Narayan Sharma v. Union of India (2023), he was the author of the majority opinion that upheld the decision of the government to invalidate high-denomination currency notes in 2016.
The Court decided that the measure of demonetisation was a legitimate exercise of the state’s authority to regulate the currency and that it was appropriate to the objective of reducing the amount of counterfeiting and criminal activity involving black money.
Justice Gavai stressed the importance of judicial restraint in areas pertaining to economic policy, while also ensuring that sufficient procedural safeguards were adhered to in collaboration with the Reserve Bank of India.
Election Bonds and Political Funding: Restoring Transparency in the Political Process
As part of the historic verdict that was handed down by the Constitution Bench in the case Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024), Justice Gavai joined his other judges in declaring the Electoral Bonds Scheme impossible to implement.
Through this technique, which was implemented in 2018, anonymous donations were sent to political parties, and public scrutiny of campaign finance was pushed to the background.
The court came to the conclusion that the plan infringed the right to information as outlined in Article 19(1)(a) because it breached the principle of transparency in political fundraising. The opinion of Justice Gavai highlighted the fact that democracy relies on the participation of educated citizens and that the lack of transparency in election finance undermines public faith in the electoral process.
Free speech and bail for activists are two fundamental rights that need to be protected.
In the case of Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat (2023), Justice Gavai displayed his dedication to safeguarding the rights and liberties of certain individuals.
In that particular case, he was the leader of the bench that overturned the Gujarat High Court’s decision to deny activist Teesta Setalvad bail. He referred to the rationale of the lower court as “perverse.”
Because of this, he argued that judgments on bail should be based on well-established legal principles rather than any extraneous considerations. This is especially important in situations where members of civil society are facing criminal charges that could potentially restrict their freedom of expression.
The panel of Justice Gavai, shortly after that, issued a second verdict in 2023 regarding the conviction of a sitting Member of Parliament for a defamation comment.
In this ruling, the bench stated that the two-year prison sentence that was given on Rahul Gandhi was harsh and lacked reasonable basis. The result of that verdict was to restore Mr. Gandhi’s parliamentary membership and to underline the necessity of proportionality in punishment, particularly where basic political rights are at stake.
Despite the fact that the case name is not commonly cited, the effect of that judgment was to restore Mr. Gandhi’s membership.
The Concept of Social Justice and Affirmative Action
During his term, Justice Gavai was sensitive to concerns of social justice and affirmative action, which was another characteristic that distinguished his tenure.
In the case of State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024), he expressed his agreement with a majority view that permitted sub-classification under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes classifications.
In recognition of the fact that a one-size-fits-all approach to reservation can result in some of the most marginalized populations being left behind, the judgment allowed for more nuanced affirmative action measures to be implemented for disadvantaged subgroups.
It was emphasized in the concurrence of Justice Gavai that the Constitution’s commitment to equality necessitates the implementation of both general and tailored measures to elevate communities that have been historically oppressed.
Determining the Boundaries of Executive Authority: The Case of Bulldozer Actions
The so-called “bulldozer justice” tendency, in which authorities demolished the properties of accused or guilty individuals without due process, was the subject of a significant verdict that Justice Gavai co-authored for the court in the latter half of the year 2024.
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the group of petitions that are often referred to as the “Bulldozer Actions Case” (2024) that such demolitions violated Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution, which safeguard freedom as well as the right to life and personal liberty.
The verdict stated that the executive branch is not permitted to assume the powers of the judicial branch by punishing suspects without providing them with a fair trial.
Under the opinion of Justice Gavai, clear standards were created for any future demolition proceedings. These criteria included the requirement of prior notice, the right to a hearing, and judicial oversight.
Abrogation of Article 370, with Regard to Constitutional Boundaries
A challenge to the decision of the central government to abrogate Article 370 and eliminate the special status of Jammu and Kashmir was most likely the most politically contentious issue that Justice Gavai worked on during his tenure.
In the case of State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Union of India (2023), Justice Gavai, part of a panel consisting of five judges, concurred with the majority ruling that upheld the competence of Parliament to modify the constitutional relationship that exists between the Union and the state that was formerly known as Jammu and Kashmir.
His decision brought to light the fact that the procedure that was followed by the government and Parliament was in accordance with the constitutional requirements, and it underlined the notion that even while undertaking politically significant reforms, it is necessary to adhere to the Constitution in its entirety.
Advocates for the Right to Free Speech for Public Officials
In January 2023, a Constitution Bench consisting of five judges, including Justice Gavai, issued a significant verdict regarding the extent of freedom of expression. The bench stated that public officials should not be subjected to limits on speech that go beyond what is stipulated in the Constitution.
The bench came to the conclusion that the Constitution already provides adequate grounds to restrict expression where it is required, and that any further statutory or administrative restrictions must be overturned with immediate effect.
Through this decision, it was reaffirmed that open debate and criticism, even from those who are employed by the government, are fundamental components of a democratic environment.
Impact & Legacy That Will Last Forever
As Justice Gavai takes over as Chief Justice of India, his extensive judicial legacy provides a road map for striking a balance between the actions of the state and the rights of individuals, enhancing procedural fairness, and increasing democratic accountability.
The parameters of contemporary Indian jurisprudence have been defined by his decisions regarding issues such as the demonetization of currency, electoral transparency, bail rights, affirmative action, protection against presidential overreach, and constitutional bounds.
The concepts that he established will continue to be drawn upon by subsequent benches, which will ensure that his influence will continue to be felt much beyond the end of his tenure.
The time when Justice B.R. Gavai served on the bench of the Supreme Court signifies a period of time during which constitutional principles were vigorously defended.
Through his decisions in cases such as Vivek Narayan Sharma v. Union of India, Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat, State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh, the Bulldozer Actions Case, and State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Union of India, as well as other landmark rulings, he has achieved a delicate equilibrium between the requirements of governance and the requirements of individual liberty.
In the process of assuming the position of Chief Justice, his body of work serves as a witness to the careful and principled decision-making that will serve as a guiding force for the Indian judiciary for many years to come.
