Why Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna’s uncle was denied the top judicial post by Indira Gandhi

More than 40 years before his nephew was sworn in as the 51st Chief Justice of India, Justice Hans Raj Khanna was once in line for the country’s highest judicial position in 1977.

On Monday, Justice Sanjiv Khanna was sworn in as the 51st CJI by President Droupadi Murmu at Rashtrapati Bhavan. Justice Khanna, who has previously served as a judge in both the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court, will hold this position for a six-month term.

Back in 1977, his uncle, Justice Hans Raj Khanna, was also a contender for the same role. However, one ruling during the Emergency imposed by then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s government eventually denied him the top legal position.

ALSO READ | Electoral bonds, Article 370 & more: The key rulings of Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the new CJI

So, what was this judgment and how did it impact his shot at becoming the CJI of India?

Who was Justice Hans Raj Khanna?

Born in 1912, Justice Hans Raj Khanna pursued his education in Amritsar before beginning his career as a lawyer.

He was appointed as a district and sessions judge in 1952, eventually serving as a judge in the Delhi and Punjab High Courts. In 1971, he became a Supreme Court judge and was considered for the role of Chief Justice of India in 1977.

What was the ADM Jabalpur vs Shivkant Shukla case?

In his autobiography, Justice Hans Raj Khanna recalled, “…On the night preceding Baisakhi, i.e., on the night of 12th April, we were sitting in the moonlight in the compound of the bungalow while in front of us flowed the Ganges, serene and beautiful. Sitting there and watching the scene, I told my younger sister, ‘Santosh, I have prepared a judgment which is going to cost me the Chief Justiceship of India.’”

Notably, he was referring to the landmark ADM Jabalpur vs Shivkant Shukla case, commonly known as the Habeas Corpus case.

The case took place during the Emergency period (1975-1977) when, on Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s direction, President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed suspended fundamental rights under Article 359.

As the people of the country, opposition leaders, and government critics were detained without trial and denied basic rights, they turned to the judiciary. It became the judiciary’s role to defend citizens’ rights, including the Right to Life and Liberty under Article 21.

Notably, the High Courts had ruled that, despite the Emergency, citizens could still approach the judiciary. However, the government of PM Indira Gandhi challenged this stance in the Supreme Court, leading to the infamous judgment in the ADM Jabalpur case.

The bench included Chief Justice AN Ray, and Justices MH Beg, YV Chandrachud, PN Bhagwati, and HR Khanna. Justice Khanna famously dissented from the majority.

Representing the Union, Attorney General of India Niren De appeared reluctantly, reportedly pressured into the role as his British wife risked facing residency issues, Live Law said in a report.

Eventually, the five-judge Constitution Bench (set up for cases involving important constitutional interpretation) ruled by a 4:1 majority that citizens had no right to seek judicial remedy during an Emergency.

‘A dissenting judgment’

Justice Khanna argued for the safeguarding of personal liberty, stating that even under Emergency conditions, the rights to life and liberty must remain sacred.

During the hearing, Justice Khanna asked, “In view of his submissions, would there be any remedy if a police officer, because of his personal enmity, killed another man?”

Attorney General Niren De responded, “It may shock your conscience, it may shock my conscience, but consistently with my submissions, no proceedings can be taken in a court of law on that score.”

Justice Khanna said, “… Detention without trial is an anathema to all those who love personal liberty.”

In an article in 1976, The New York Times wrote, “If India ever finds a way back to the freedom and democracy that were proud hallmarks of its first eighteen years as an independent nation, someone will surely erect a monument to Justice HR Khanna of the Supreme Court.”

Why Indira Gandhi denied CJI post to Justice Khanna

Simply put, Indira Gandhi denied Justice Khanna the role of CJI due to his dissenting judgment in the ADM Jabalpur vs Shiv Kant Shukla case, which challenged her government’s stance.

In 1977, when Chief Justice AN Ray’s term ended, Justice Khanna, the senior-most judge on the Supreme Court, was passed over for the position. Instead, Justice MH Beg, who had supported the government in the ADM case, was appointed Chief Justice.

As a sign of protest, Justice Khanna resigned the same day after he was informed about the decision over the radio. His commitment to defending constitutional rights ultimately cost him the role of Chief Justice.

After the 21-month Emergency ended and Indira Gandhi’s government fell, Justice Khanna was appointed chairman of the Law Commission, a position he held until 1979. He also briefly served as Union Minister of Law and Justice under Prime Minister Charan Singh, though he resigned within three days.

In 1982, Justice Khanna stood as the opposition’s candidate in the presidential election but lost to Zail Singh.

His nephew is now CJI

Now, 47 years later, Justice Hans Raj Khanna’s legacy continues as his nephew, Justice Sanjiv Khanna , takes office as the 51st Chief Justice of India.

Appointed as a Supreme Court judge in January 2019, CJI Khanna has been part of key decisions, including judgments on the integrity of electronic voting machines (EVMs), the scrapping of the electoral bonds scheme, the abrogation of Article 370, and granting interim bail to former Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal.

A third-generation legal professional, Justice Khanna began his career as a lawyer before he was appointed a judge in the Delhi High Court. He is known for his commitment to reducing case backlogs and speeding up justice delivery

He graduated in law from Delhi University’s Campus Law Centre and joined the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983. Practising initially in Tis Hazari courts and the Delhi High Court, he delivered arguments in several criminal cases as an additional public prosecutor and amicus curiae.

He also had an extensive tenure as senior standing counsel for the Income Tax Department and later as standing counsel (civil) for the National Capital Territory of Delhi in 2004.

Throughout his judicial career, CJI Khanna also served as executive chairman of the National Legal Service Authority.