New Delhi: In a powerful and thought-provoking farewell address, Supreme Court Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, on his last working day on May 23, 2025, called for a significant transformation in the functioning of India’s apex court. Justice Oka, who retired after a remarkable three-year and nine-month tenure, emphasized that the Supreme Court must move away from being a “Chief Justice-centric court” to a more democratic institution that reflects the collective strength of its 34 judges from diverse regions of India. His remarks, delivered during a ceremonial bench and an event organized by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), underscored the need for transparency, reduced manual intervention in case listing, and a renewed focus on strengthening the district judiciary to uphold constitutional liberties.
A Call for Democratic Functioning in the Supreme Court
Justice Oka’s address highlighted the disproportionate powers vested in the Chief Justice of India (CJI), describing the Supreme Court as overly reliant on the CJI’s authority. He contrasted this with the High Courts, which operate more democratically through administrative committees comprising their top five judges. “The Supreme Court is a court of 34 judges who come from different areas of the country. Therefore, the image of the Chief Justice-centric court needs to be changed,” Justice Oka stated, urging for a system where decisions are made collectively rather than centralized in the CJI’s office.
The retiring judge pointed out that the CJI’s role as the “Master of the Roster” grants them significant influence over judicial outcomes. The CJI has the prerogative to constitute benches and allocate cases, a power that can shape the course of justice. Citing the case Shanti Bhushan Vs Supreme Court of India (2018), Justice Oka noted that this authority allows the CJI to control the assignment of Constitution Bench cases, often presiding over them personally. Since 1950, CJIs have dissented in only 14 Constitution Bench cases, a statistic that underscores their dominant role in major judicial decisions. Additionally, the CJI’s control over case listing enables them to delay hearings by withholding bench constitution, potentially impacting timely justice in controversial matters.
Justice Oka advocated for minimizing “manual intervention” in case listing to ensure fairness and transparency. “Why are only selected matters being listed? During the pandemic, listing was automated. We cannot have a better process of listing cases without ruling out manual intervention,” he remarked. He suggested leveraging Artificial Intelligence and advanced software to rationalize case scheduling, addressing public concerns about why some cases are heard within 24 hours while others languish for 20 days or more.
Transparency Initiatives in the Supreme Court
Justice Oka acknowledged recent steps taken to democratize the Supreme Court’s functioning. In 2018, the judges’ roster was made public following concerns over case allocation, and a subject-wise roster system was introduced to enhance transparency. In 2019, a five-judge Constitution Bench declared the CJI’s office a “public authority” under the Right to Information (RTI) Act in the Subhash Chandra Agarwal Case, making it subject to greater public scrutiny. Additionally, the Supreme Court mandated the public declaration of judges’ assets on its website, a move aimed at fostering accountability. In 2025, the court furthered transparency by uploading the judicial appointment process for High Courts and the Supreme Court on its website, promoting public awareness.
Justice Oka praised the efforts of former CJI Sanjiv Khanna, who introduced greater transparency after consultations with colleagues, and current CJI B.R. Gavai, who takes decisions in Full Court meetings rather than in isolation. “Chief Justice B.R. Gavai also takes decisions in Full Court meetings, and not in his chambers,” Justice Oka noted, signaling a shift toward collective decision-making.
Justice Oka’s Judicial Legacy
Justice Oka’s tenure at the Supreme Court, which began on August 31, 2021, was marked by an extraordinary judicial output. On his final day, he delivered 11 judgments, a testament to his dedication, even as he returned from his mother’s funeral in Thane, Maharashtra, the previous day. Over his nearly four-year stint, Justice Oka authored 370 judgments and was part of over 1,000 decisions, addressing critical issues such as freedom of expression, environmental protection, and procedural safeguards under stringent laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
CJI Gavai described Justice Oka as a “workaholic” whose court ensured that “the smallest voices were not only heard, but honored.” His judgments emphasized ecological balance, government accountability, and the protection of fundamental rights, particularly the right to free speech, even when the voices were “inconvenient or unpopular.” Justice Oka’s rulings on the PMLA strengthened the rights of the accused, ensuring fair investigation and trial processes. “The job of a Judge is not to be popular… I believe that this is one court which can uphold constitutional liberties,” he said, reflecting on the Supreme Court’s role as the guardian of constitutional values.
Strengthening the District Judiciary
Justice Oka also drew attention to the neglected state of India’s trial and district courts, which he described as the “backbone” of the judiciary. He highlighted the massive pendency of cases, with some lingering for over 30 years, and stressed the need to equip the district judiciary to deliver justice to the common man. “High courts function more democratically than the Supreme Court because there is an administrative committee of the first five judges in place. Major decisions are taken by the administrative committee,” he said, suggesting that the Supreme Court could adopt a similar model to enhance efficiency and fairness.
A Farewell Marked by Emotion and Resolve
The ceremonial bench, presided over by CJI Gavai, lasted 90 minutes, with prominent lawyers, including Attorney General R. Venkatramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, lauding Justice Oka’s contributions. Venkatramani noted that Justice Oka’s judgments on criminal law and environmental causes provided “considerable food for thought,” while CJI Gavai praised his unwavering commitment to liberty, freedom of speech, and government accountability. “His judgments shaped the legal landscape in environment protection, holding the government accountable, safeguarding freedom of speech and expression, protecting the rights of labor and the marginalized,” CJI Gavai said.
In an emotional moment, Justice Oka admitted to being “speechless” after receiving overwhelming praise from the bar. “I have seen such great love and affection for me by the members of the bar that made me speechless,” he said, noting it was the first time in his professional career that he allowed others to speak without interruption.
A Career of Judicial Excellence
Justice Oka’s judicial journey began on August 29, 2003, as an additional judge of the Bombay High Court. He later served as the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court from May 2019 before his elevation to the Supreme Court. Known for his intellect, judicial acumen, and empathy, Justice Oka was the third most senior judge in the Supreme Court at the time of his retirement at age 65. Remarkably, he never delivered a dissenting judgment during his tenure, except for one instance two days before his retirement. “Neither my colleagues dissented. Only one exception happened two days back,” he revealed.
Justice Oka also shared his post-retirement plans, stating that he and CJI Gavai had decided not to accept any post-retirement assignments. “Both of us have already decided that we will not accept any post-retirement assignments and therefore, we can think of working together (after retirement),” CJI Gavai said, hinting at potential future collaborations.
Addressing the Media and Public Expectations
Justice Oka emphasized his cautious approach to media interactions, stating that he would not give interviews immediately after retirement. “I have taken a stand that talking to the media while I am holding office is out of the question. I would never do that. I will need a cooling period of two to three months,” he said, citing the need to avoid emotional statements that could be misconstrued.
Reflecting on the Supreme Court’s 75th anniversary on January 28, 2025, Justice Oka called for introspection rather than celebration. “Citizens of the country had very high expectations from this court. Though no one can deny the contribution of this court, my personal view is that the Supreme Court has not fulfilled the expectations of the citizens of India,” he said. With a pendency of 80,000 cases and a sanctioned strength of 34 judges, he stressed the need for joint efforts between the bench and the bar to reduce arrears and improve judicial efficiency.
Conclusion
Justice A.S. Oka’s farewell address serves as a clarion call for reforming the Supreme Court’s functioning to make it more democratic, transparent, and responsive to the needs of India’s citizens. His emphasis on reducing the CJI’s disproportionate powers, minimizing manual intervention in case listing, and strengthening the district judiciary reflects a vision for a judiciary that truly upholds constitutional liberties. As one of the most prolific and principled judges in the Supreme Court’s history, Justice Oka’s legacy will continue to inspire efforts to make the apex court a more inclusive and accountable institution.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Why did Justice A.S. Oka describes the Supreme Court as “Chief Justice-centric”?
Justice Oka highlighted that the Supreme Court’s functioning is heavily centered around the Chief Justice of India (CJI), who holds significant powers, such as constituting benches, allocating cases, and controlling case listings as the “Master of the Roster.” This authority allows the CJI to influence judicial outcomes, assign Constitution Bench cases (often presiding over them), and delay hearings, which can impact timely justice. He contrasted this with the more democratic functioning of High Courts, where administrative committees of senior judges make collective decisions.
2. What reforms did Justice Oka propose for the Supreme Court?
Justice Oka advocated for a shift toward a more democratic Supreme Court by reducing the CJI’s disproportionate powers. He suggested minimizing “manual intervention” in case listings by leveraging Artificial Intelligence and software for rational scheduling to ensure fairness. He also emphasized the need for collective decision-making, similar to High Courts, and strengthening the district judiciary to address case pendency and deliver justice to the common man.
3. What steps have been taken to increase transparency in the Supreme Court?
Recent initiatives include making the judges’ roster public in 2018, introducing a subject-wise roster system, declaring the CJI’s office a “public authority” under the RTI Act in 2019 (Subhash Chandra Agarwal Case), mandating public declaration of judges’ assets on the Supreme Court’s website, and uploading the judicial appointment process for High Courts and the Supreme Court in 2025 to promote public awareness.
4. What was Justice Oka’s judicial legacy at the Supreme Court?
During his three-year and nine-month tenure starting August 31, 2021, Justice Oka authored 370 judgments and was part of over 1,000 decisions. His rulings focused on protecting freedom of expression, ensuring ecological balance, holding the government accountable, and safeguarding procedural rights under laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). He delivered 11 judgments on his final day, May 23, 2025, despite attending his mother’s funeral the previous day.
5. How did Justice Oka address the issue of case pendency in the judiciary?
Justice Oka highlighted the massive pendency of 80,000 cases in the Supreme Court and cases lingering for over 30 years in trial courts. He stressed that the district judiciary, the “backbone” of the judiciary, must be equipped to deliver justice efficiently. He called for joint efforts between the bench and the bar to reduce arrears and suggested adopting a more democratic administrative model, like that of High Courts, to enhance the Supreme Court’s efficiency.
