Meet our new Chief Justice of India
The TLDR: On Saturday, SA Bobde ended his tenure as Chief Justice of India—and the assessments of his legacy were not kind. But will his successor NV Ramana fare any better?
Who is NV Ramana?
He is the first lawyer in his Andhra family whose trade is most often described as ‘agriculturists’—not farmers—perhaps to signal that he comes from a rural but not exactly modest background. As Business Standard puts it:
“[H]is family belongs to Andhra Pradesh’s Krishna district, the area of influence of the Kamma caste, the powerful landed ruling elite of the Coromandel coast. Legendary Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N T Rama Rao; son-in-law and once close lieutenant, N Chandrababu Naidu; and the Delhi face of the Telugu Desam Party, P Upendra, are all Kammas. So is former Supreme Court judge J Chelameswar, current Supreme Court judge L Nageswara Rao—and Ramana.”
His career trajectory has been something like this:
- He first dabbled with journalism at a Telugu newspaper.
- A legal career that started at the Andhra Pradesh High Court Bar in 1983.
- He was additional standing counsel for the union government and the Indian Railways.
- Ramana first became the Additional Advocate General of Andhra Pradesh and then a member of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 2000—where he served for 13 years, including a two-month stint as Chief Justice.
- He became Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court in September 2013 and joined the Supreme Court in February 2014.
Point to note: Most profiles of Ramana mention his youthful idealism on matters of civil liberties especially in the years leading up to the Emergency—when his father “was afraid I would be arrested.” He often says, “I became a lawyer by coincidence.”
Key judgments
A judge is best understood by his rulings, and here’s what Ramana ruled at the Supreme Court.
Kashmir: The most significant is his judgement in a case that involved the restoration of the internet in Kashmir in January 2020. He essentially ruled that the freedom to practice any profession, trade or occupation over the internet is protected by the Constitution. He observed: “Freedom of speech and expression includes the right to disseminate information to as wide a section of the population as possible”—noting that the very reach of the internet cannot be used to prohibit its use. But as a lawyer points out, the ruling was not exactly a stirring defense of that right:
“He was entirely right in the law. But in the enforcement of it, he still left it to the administration. You could say he sat on the fence. But he did not resort to a popular option, unlike other judges who created their own law to justify whatever the government was doing.”
Point to note: In March, 2020, he refused to refer a batch of pleas challenging the abrogation of Article 370 to a larger bench.
UAPA: The draconian law allows the government to hold suspects for months without bail or trial. In a recent ruling, Ramana held that Constitutional Courts could still grant bail by upholding the defendant’s right to a speedy trial. But this appears to only apply to cases where the accused have already spent years in jail without trial.
Maharashtra: Ramana, in general, appears to be opposed to political horse-trading—as in the case of Maharashtra, where he ordered a floor test in 2019 to determine whether then CM Devendra Fadnavis had the seats to hold on to power.
The no-shows: Ramana has also ducked out of some of the most contentious cases in recent years. He recused himself from the constitutional bench that ruled on the Babri Masjid-Ayodhya case—and from the committee formed to investigate sexual harassment allegations against then Chief Justice Gogoi.
What Ramana says: Apart from his rulings, Ramana emphasizes equal access to justice and civil liberties in his speeches. In a recent convocation address, he told law school graduates,
“The most vulnerable are often the victims of human rights atrocities, by either the state or by anti-social elements. As young advocates, you are best placed to strongly oppose the same through legal action. You must be the conscience-bearers of the nation.”
A personality profile
Not a firebrand: Everyone emphasizes Ramana’s low-key personality. One Supreme Court lawyer says: “He’s an establishment man… but he does his own thinking—and he puts the law first.” Another lawyer told Leaflet: “He is not the kind of judge who will clash with the executive. Nor is he likely to cause ripples through his legal pronouncements. His will be a quiet term.” In other words, Ramana is unlikely to make big waves, nor is he interested in doing so.
Honest and politically savvy: No one questions Ramana’s legal acumen or integrity, but he is not naïve: “Let’s put it this way: this is a man who’s had more than a passing interest in politics; who knows how the political system works, but has essentially striven to be correct in law.”
A soft spot for the underprivileged: Most lawyers agree Ramana is a people-first judge:
“He does not believe only in abstract and theoretical interpretation of law. He is aware that the law has to deal with people’s problems. And he sees the function of law as a means to help people… He sympathises with the plight of the people who knock on the doors on the doors of the Supreme Court and seek justice.”
One part of this is his insistence that legal rulings use clear language so they can be understood by all.
A cloud of suspicion
The allegations: In 2020, Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y S Jaganmohan Reddy wrote a letter to Chief Justice Bobde alleging a cosy relationship between his rival Chandrababu Naidu and Ramana. He basically said that Ramana had benefitted Naidu by ensuring his cases appeared in front of sympathetic judges:
“Justice Ramana’s proximity to Chandrababu Naidu is too well-known. I am making this statement with utmost responsibility… Justice Ramana has been influencing the sittings of the high court including the roster of a few honorable judges and instances of a few matters important to Telugu Desam have been allotted to a few judges.”
In return, Naidu had illegally allotted land in Amaravati—which was once supposed to become the new capital—to Ramana’s daughters. The Wire has the FIR issued in the Amaravati case—which was filed after Reddy came to power.
The counterview: The timing of Reddy’s letter is suspicious. Many have pointed to the fact that Ramana was heading a bench hearing on a petition to fast-track criminal cases against current and former MPs and MLAs—including 30 cases of corruption against Reddy himself. Times of India did an extensive analysis of Reddy’s allegations and found little merit. And on the land purchase, one senior Supreme Court justice said: “They [the daughters] are entitled to buy land like any other citizen of the country. If purchasing land in the country is a criminal offence, then the judge’s daughters are guilty.”
Point to note: The Telegraph appears to insinuate that Reddy was in cahoots with the government in taking on Ramana. And one advocate told Business Standard: “Both, when he was due to be appointed to the Supreme Court and when he was about to be Chief Justice, there have been attempts to derail his elevation.”
A sour point: The Supreme Court sat on Reddy’s letter for months, conducted an internal investigation, and then issued Ramana a clean chit—in a single document without revealing the evidence or the basis of its conclusion. Scroll and Leaflet have more on the complete lack of transparency. OTOH, the Attorney General refused to file contempt charges against Reddy for making serious allegations in such a public manner against a sitting Supreme Court justice.
Ramana’s view: While he has never directly addressed the allegations, he told the Madras Bar Association in a speech: “It is an important quality for a judge to withstand all pressures and odds and to stand up bravely against all obstacles.”
The bottomline: No one really knows what kind of leadership Ramana will bring to the highest court. But the bar has been set so low in recent years, he will have to work fairly hard not to raise it.
Reading list
Leaflet, Business Standard (paywall) and The Hindu have the best profiles of Ramana. Gautam Bhatia in The Wire pens a scathing indictment of Justice Bobde. Also read: Scroll on why the SC’s clean chit to Ramana is problematic. And The Telegraph lays out why Reddy’s attack on Ramana may be politically motivated.