Justice Surya Kant, who is set to take charge as the country’s 53rd Chief Justice on November 24, speaking to HT in an interview reflected on the human dimension of delivering justice, the patience he learned as a farmer’s son and the institutional discipline he believes should strengthen the judiciary. Edited excerpts:
1) Why did you decide to study law? Was it a natural choice or a leap of faith?
Justice Kant: Studying law was a decision made out of a mixture of passion, curiosity and a desire to make an impact. From an early age, I was attracted to debates and loved discussing social issues, which naturally drew me towards the study of law. I felt as if this was not just an academic pursuit, but an extension of my personal strengths and interests. Of course, it was also a leap of faith. Law is a demanding field that requires years of commitment, adaptability and flexibility. I had to trust that my passion would endure the rigorous workload and that I could deal with the uncertainty of such a competitive profession. Choosing law means accepting the responsibility of shaping your path in a discipline that is as challenging as it is rewarding.
2) Having been a judge for 21 years, how do you deal with the human side of administering justice – when the law may demand one thing, but conscience pulls the other way?
Justice Kant: After 21 years on the bench, I have come to understand that the human side of judgment is both inevitable and necessary. The law provides the framework, precedents, and structure that ensure fairness in all cases, but every decision also involves human stories, emotions, and struggles. When conscience leans one direction and the law points another, my approach is first to acknowledge that tension rather than suppress it. I begin by grounding myself in the law, while also looking for legitimate ways to respect the human realities before us – whether through careful selection of treatments, or using discretion where the law allows it. Ultimately, I acknowledge that my duty is to enforce the law as faithfully as possible, but I strive to do so with compassion, clarity, and respect for those whose lives are affected. It’s a balance: The law keeps me steady, and my conscience ensures I never forget the humanity behind the cases I decide.
3) How would you describe your justice philosophy – literal, purposive, or humanistic? Do you believe that judges should be social reformers or neutral interpreters?
Justice Kant: My philosophy of justice leans toward the humanistic approach, although it includes elements of both textual and purposive interpretation. I believe that the ultimate goal of law is to serve the people and preserve their dignity while maintaining fairness and stability. While textual interpretation ensures adherence to the rule of law, and purposive interpretation seeks to respect legislative intent, a humanistic philosophy allows these aspects to be balanced with empathy and practical realities. With regard to the role of judges, I believe they should act primarily as neutral interpreters of the law while being mindful of the broader social context. Judges must ensure that justice is administered impartially, without covert personal bias or overt social engineering. This means that a judge does not necessarily become a social reformer, but can indirectly influence progress by interpreting the law in a manner consistent with constitutional principles and human welfare.
4) You have been the Chief Justice of High Courts and have also handled many administrative responsibilities. What lessons have you learned about leadership within the judiciary?
Justice Kant: My tenure as Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court and my many administrative responsibilities have taught me many important lessons about ensuring that the judiciary always remains responsive to the needs of the society. Every decision of the Court, whether administrative or judicial, must adhere to the highest standards of ethical integrity and strengthen public confidence. Administrative experience has shown me that even small changes – whether in procedural guidelines, court infrastructure, or digital adoption – can have a transformative impact on justice delivery if implemented with clarity and determination. Effective leadership in the judiciary requires a deep commitment to institution building. Courts are not just individual judges but collective bodies whose credibility depends on consistency, discipline and efficiency. Streamlining case management, leveraging technology for faster disposal of cases and promoting a culture of punctuality and preparation among judges and staff are essential aspects of this work. Years of experience have reinforced in me that empathy and communication are indispensable. Judges and court staff face enormous pressure; Listening to and inspiring their concerns fosters an environment where justice can flourish. Equally, constructively engaging with the Bar helps in maintaining the smooth functioning of the judicial process. Decades of judgeship have taught me that reform is a continuous process and my wealth of experience will stand me in good stead as I step into my new role as Chief Justice of India.
5) You have lived and worked in many cities – Hisar, Chandigarh, Shimla, Delhi. Which of these still feels most like home?
Justice Kant: Having lived and worked in Hisar, Chandigarh, Shimla and Delhi, I have observed that each city, despite its unique character, shares certain similarities. All four are deeply rooted in rich cultural traditions, where community life, local cuisine and festivals play a central role. They also reflect a balance of modern amenities and historical influence – be it the natural beauty of Shimla, the architecture of Chandigarh, the rustic charm of Hissar, or the rich heritage of Delhi. They all provide that sense of rootedness where tradition and progress co-exist. Each city has shaped my outlook in its own way – Hisar molded me into simplicity, Chandigarh taught me precision, Shimla instilled an appreciation for peace, and Delhi instilled patience – together enriching my professional and personal life.
The frequency of my visits to Delhi throughout my career has truly made it a home away from home. The sense of belonging that it provides as the national capital and my familiarity with its pulse has truly made it a second home to me. Delhi’s fast pace combines opportunity, connectivity and comfortable familiarity, making it feel like the natural center of my life.
6) People close to you say that you have “the patience of a farmer and the sympathy of a poet”. How do poetry and nature shape your judicial philosophy? Do these identities still inform your worldview as a judge and CJI?
Justice Kant: As someone who has plowed the fields of Petwar from a young age, I know firsthand that a farmer’s patience comes from knowing that real growth requires time, care and flexibility. This hard-won lesson has taught me to approach each case methodically – listening carefully, weighing all the evidence, and letting the process unfold without rushing to decisions. Justice, like the harvest, cannot be forced; It must be developed with diligence and respect for the natural rhythms of the appropriate process.
Meanwhile, a poet’s empathy allows me to see beyond the facts on paper and recognize the human stories woven into every controversy. It forces me to consider the perspectives, struggles, and emotions of all parties involved, without succumbing to bias. In combination with these identities, I have always striven to ensure that my decisions are not only legally correct, but also humane, reflecting a worldview where the law serves the people, not the other way around. Together, patience and empathy guide me in balancing principle with firmness and compassion with wisdom.
7) What will be your priorities once you take charge?
Justice Kant: One of my biggest challenges is pending in the Supreme Court. Today’s scoreboard shows nearly 90,000 cases pending. I don’t know the reason whether the listing is bad or the cases are increasing. But what matters is the excellence and vision. My aim is maximum use of force. As CJI, I have to take care of the dues on an all India basis. Thousands of cases are pending because the Supreme Court has not been able to hear them. Many cases cannot be raised before the High Courts and lower courts because the related issues are pending before the Supreme Court. I will explore those cases, ensure that benches are formed and they are decided. I will try to look at even the oldest cases. I need to understand the reasons for pending cases and why people are coming directly to the Supreme Court. There must be some reason. First of all, there is a need to revive the healthy practices of approaching lower courts. The High Courts are constitutional courts—they have co-equal power.
The second issue is that of arbitration. We must identify a solution, and one of the easiest solutions, which can be a game changer, is mediation. We will have to persuade government agencies to come forward and mediate. The opinion given by the Prime Minister on 8 November gives a positive indication of creating an environment for mediation among all stakeholders.
Question: Nowadays, judiciary is misused more than politics on social media. So, do you think there is pressure on the CJI to create a better image on social media?
Answer: I do not think that any judge or CJI should come under pressure. I have never faced any pressure like this. In my opinion in any case CJI should not be there or any judge should not be there because when you become CJI what else do you need? If I did not come under this pressure when I was a High Court judge, High Court Chief Justice or Supreme Court judge, then why should I be under pressure after becoming CJI?
