Sharad Arvind Bobde , Chief Justice of india

Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, son of eminent senior advocate Arvind Shriniwas Bobde, was born in Nagpur on April 24, 1956. He was appointed as the 47th Chief Justice of India on November 18, 2019 and his tenure will end on April 23, 2021. Bobde had been chosen following the rule of seniority and his name was recommended by Chief Justice Gogoi in a letter to the Centre.


Sharad Arvind Bobde

12 Apr 2013 – 23 Apr 2021

Elevation from: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enrolment: 1978,

Bar Council of Maharashtra Chief Justice of India Sharad Arvind Bobde is the son of Arvind Bobde, former Advocate General of Maharashtra. Chief Justice Bobde practiced in the Bombay High Court and Supreme Court for over 21 years. In 1998, he was designated as a Senior Advocate. On 29 March, 2000 Chief Justice Bobde was appointed as an Additional Judge to the Bombay High Court. Then 12 years later, on 16 October, 2012 he was appointed as the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

courtsey : bar & bench twitter

On 18 November 2019, Chief Justice Bobde succeeded CJI Ranjan Gogoi and became the 47th Chief Justice of India. Notable Judgements 2019: Jogendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh A three-judge bench commuted a convict’s death penalty to life imprisonment on appeal. The Madhya Pradesh High Court had sentenced the appellant to death for causing a woman’s death, while being out on bail for another offence. Justice Bobde applied the principle of Bachchan Singh and held that mitigating circumstances in the case prevented it from meeting the ‘rarest of rare’ requirement. 2017: K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India A nine-judge bench unanimously affirmed the fundamental right to privacy.

Justice Bobde authored a separate concurring opinion recognising privacy as a natural right residing in multiple fundamental rights, with its core in the right to life. He clarified that Aadhar is a fair, just and reasonable restriction on privacy. Abhiram Singh v. CD Commachen A seven-judge bench held that the bar against appealing to communal sentiments for electoral votes extends to both the voters and the candidates.

Justice Bobde authored a separate concurring opinion emphasising that there is no bar against the purposive interpretation of penal statutes. He stated that purposive interpretation can be used for penal provisions when the legislative intent is defeated by plain interpretation. Savita Sachin Patil v. Union of India His Division bench rejected a woman’s plea to terminate a foetus afflicted with Down syndrome. Poojaya Sri Jagadguru Maate Mahadevi v. Government of Karnataka He led the Division bench that upheld the Karnataka Government’s ban on a book by Mate Mahadevi for outraging the religious feelings of Lord Basavanna’s followers.

to read more Click here


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here