In the bustling corridors of India’s judicial system, few events garner as much quiet anticipation and deep respect as the appointment of new Supreme Court judges. On May 30, 2025, three accomplished jurists — Justices N.V. Anjaria, Vijay Bishnoi, and Atul S. Chandurkar — took their oaths to serve at the apex of India’s judiciary. These appointments, while procedural in nature, represent more than just seats being filled. They are symbolic of the evolving face of Indian jurisprudence, bringing in individuals who have weathered the long, testing journey from courtroom floors to the country’s highest bench. Each of these men brings with him not just legal knowledge but also lived experience in confronting the many complexities and contradictions of Indian law and society. As we look at their careers, cases, and character, we are reminded that behind every black robe is a life spent relentlessly chasing justice.
Justice Nilay Vipinchandra Anjaria was born in Ahmedabad on March 23, 1965, and his connection to Gujarat is not just geographical but professional. He pursued his LL.B. from Sir L.A. Shah Law College and then went on to earn an LL.M. from Gujarat University. Rather than leaping directly into private legal glory, Anjaria chose to train under the esteemed Senior Advocate S.N. Shelat, known for his methodical approach to constitutional and administrative law. That early tutelage shaped Anjaria’s trajectory in fundamental ways. As a lawyer, he honed his skills dealing with a wide array of subjects — constitutional petitions, labor law disputes, service matters, and civil litigation — becoming a known name in the Gujarat High Court.
His elevation to the Gujarat High Court bench in 2011 was met with quiet approval, but it was the nature of his judgments that began to attract broader attention. One of his significant rulings involved a 2018 case concerning reservation quotas in state recruitment. In this, he balanced the often conflicting aims of social justice and meritocracy, emphasizing that affirmative action must always walk the tightrope between redress and fairness. In 2024, he was elevated to Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court — a move that proved crucial. He oversaw several sensitive matters, including the Karnataka Hijab row appeals that landed before the court again after procedural delays. He was praised for maintaining decorum in the courtroom and issuing a neutral order to expedite a resolution without leaning politically in either direction. His calm handling of a case that could easily have been polarised is a testament to the restraint required of a judge.
Justice Vijay Bishnoi, by contrast, has always carried an air of tenacity. Born in Jodhpur, Rajasthan, on March 26, 1964, Bishnoi started his career as an advocate in 1989, practicing across the Rajasthan High Court and various tribunals. His early years were marked by versatility: from land acquisition cases to criminal appeals, from administrative law to constitutional interpretation, he became known as a dependable and detail-oriented counsel. He served as Additional Central Government Standing Counsel from 2000 to 2004, which gave him exposure to central laws and policies in implementation — a grounding that would serve him well later as a judge.
When he was elevated as a judge of the Rajasthan High Court in 2013, Bishnoi carried that practical know-how to the bench. But his defining moment came during the pandemic years when he heard a high-profile matter concerning the rights of migrant workers. Rajasthan, with its large migrant population, saw mass movement and hardship during the COVID lockdowns. Bishnoi’s judgment ordered the state to provide comprehensive rehabilitation — including housing, job support, and travel assistance — to those affected, even going beyond what the government had initially proposed. The judgment was hailed not just for its empathy, but for grounding that empathy in existing constitutional duties of the state under Article 21. In February 2024, he was appointed Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court, where he notably expedited long-pending cases regarding the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and stressed that administrative failures should not translate into human suffering. His ruling that technical lapses must not be the sole basis for excluding people from citizenship is likely to be cited in future jurisprudence on citizenship and identity.
Justice Atul S. Chandurkar brings yet another distinct strength to the bench: an academic’s precision fused with a trial lawyer’s realism. Having started his practice in 1988, he quickly became known in the Bombay High Court’s Nagpur Bench for his scholarship, especially in municipal and rent control law. He didn’t just argue cases; he wrote the books that others would cite in court. His authored works on the Maharashtra Municipal Council Act and the Rent Control Act became go-to references for lawyers and judges alike. It’s rare for a sitting judge to have shaped the understanding of a statute both from outside and inside the courtroom.
Justice Chandurkar’s most noteworthy contribution as a judge came in 2024, just before his Supreme Court elevation. A case challenging the constitutional validity of the Central Government’s Fact Check Unit under the amended IT Rules came before a split bench. The case had drawn nationwide attention — the concern was whether giving the government powers to label digital content as “fake” without judicial oversight was an infringement on the freedom of the press and expression. Chandurkar, acting as the third judge brought in after a split verdict, ruled that the amendments were unconstitutional. His decision emphasised that free speech cannot exist at the mercy of executive satisfaction. His reasoning drew from precedent but was uniquely framed to address the digital age, stating that “speech may be online, but the values it upholds are timeless.” This decision is now expected to be a foundation for digital rights cases in India going forward.
Together, the three judges represent more than just new appointments. They represent a judicial ethos that values constitutional balance, social empathy, and forward-thinking. The Indian judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, has always had a role far more nuanced than mere legal arbitration. As the final interpreter of the Constitution, it is called upon to resolve not only legal but also moral and philosophical dilemmas. Whether it’s matters of faith and secularism, privacy and surveillance, or speech and censorship, the bench often walks into territory where laws end and lived experience begins. For a Supreme Court justice, the responsibility is not simply to know the law, but to understand society’s pulse — to read the times without becoming a prisoner of them.
Being a Supreme Court judge in India is not just about writing judgments; it is about shaping the collective conscience of the country. Their decisions form the legal skeleton that holds together the muscle of our democracy. From S.R. Bommai to Kesavananda Bharati, from Navtej Johar to Shayara Bano, Supreme Court rulings have altered the direction of national thought. And for every new judge, that responsibility begins with understanding that no decision is made in a vacuum — every judgment touches lives, changes futures, and becomes part of the country’s legal memory.
As Justices Anjaria, Bishnoi, and Chandurkar settle into their roles at the highest court, the legal fraternity watches not just with expectation but hope — that they will uphold the dignity of the office, interpret the Constitution not as a static document but a living promise, and navigate the increasingly complex intersection between law and life with wisdom. For the litigant waiting in the hallway, the lawyer flipping through pages, or the citizen reading headlines, these justices are not just individuals. They are the latest custodians of justice — and in India, that’s a burden and an honour like no other.