Ranjan Gogoi
Ranjan Gogoi (born 18 November 1954) is an Indian former Judge of the Supreme Court of India who served as the 46th Chief Justice of India for 13 months between 2018 and 2019. He was nominated to Rajya Sabha by President Ram Nath Kovind on 16 March 2020.
Gogoi was born into a political family and he descends from the Ahom Dynasty. His maternal grandparents were both state legislators, and his grandmother Padma *ari Gohain was one of the first female MLAs and one of the first female state ministers in *am. His father, Kesab Chandra Gogoi served as Chief Minister of *am for two months in 1982. Gogoi is the only Chief Justice, to have been the son of a Chief Minister.
Gogoi graduated from Faculty of Law, University of Delhi and enrolled at the bar in 1978. He served as a judge of Gauhati High Court from 2001 to 2010 and a judge of Punjab and Haryana High court from 2010 to 2011. He was appointed Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court in 2011 and served until 2012. He was nominated to the Supreme Court in 2012. He oversaw many important judgements as a Supreme Court Justice, including the updating of the National Register of Citizens for *am, and the Soumya Murder case. He was appointed Chief Justice of India in 2018 and served until 2019. During his tenure, he oversaw several more important judgements, including the Ayodhya dispute and he retired in 2019. In 2020 he was nominated to the Rajya Sabha.
He is the third Supreme Court judge to serve the Rajya Sabha, and the first to be nominated to his seat, after Ranganath Mishra and Baharul Islam, who were elected as members of the Indian National Congress. He has also written an autobiography named "Justice for the Judge: An Autobiography". In 2019, he was listed as the third most powerful person in India.
Contents
- 1 Early life and education
- 2 Judicial career
- 3 Personal life
- 4 Significant judgments and orders
- 4.1 On arbitration
- 4.2 On re-*essment of income of Amitabh Bachchan
- 4.3 Dismissal of pe*ion seeking a Special Investigation Team probe
- 4.4 On Govindaswamy vs State of Kerala
- 4.5 On people who are originally inhabitants of the state of *am
- 4.6 Rafale Deal
- 4.7 Ayodhya dispute
- 5 Member of Rajya Sabha
- 6 Controversies
- 6.1 2018 Supreme Court crisis
- 6.2 2019 Sexual Har*ment Allegations
- 7 See also
- 8 References
- 9 External links
Early life and education
Ranjan Gogoi was born in a Tai-Ahom family with family residence at the K.C. Gogoi Path in Dibrugarh. His mother's family can be traced back to Ahom Kingdom's royal family of Swargadeo Gadadhar Singha. Gogoi is a direct descendant and sixth Great-grandson of Ahom King Swargadeo Rajeswar Singha and Great-great-grandnephew of Swargadeo Purandar Singha. His father was Kesab Chandra Gogoi, an Indian National Congress politician who served as Chief Minister of *am from 13 January 1982 to 19 March 1982. His mother was Shanti Priya Gogoi, who was a social activist and writer. His mother was also a leading figure in *amese literary and social circles and she founded the Socio Educational Welfare *ociation (SEWA) for the upliftment of marginalised communities. Shanti Gogoi was an aunt of Shrinjan Raj*ar Gohain. Both his maternal grandparents Jogesh Chandra Borgohain and Padma *ari Gohain were legislators and ministers in pre-and post-Independence India. Gogoi has one elder brother, one younger brother and two younger sisters. Gogoi attended Don Bosco school in Dibrugarh and Cotton College (currently known as Cotton University) in Guwahati before moving to Delhi to complete his higher studies. He then studied at St. Stephen's College, Delhi, graduating with honours in history. After completing his bachelor's degree, Gogoi cracked the Civil Services Examination to keep his father's wish. He, later on, told his father that his interest lies in pursuing law instead. He graduated from Faculty of Law, University of Delhi where he received a law degree. In 1982, the then Law Minister Abdul Muhib Mazumder asked Kesab Chandra Gogoi if his son would also become the Chief Minister of *am someday. Mr Gogoi said his son Ranjan Gogoi would not emulate him, but had the potential to become the Chief Justice of India. The father's *essment proved prophetic.
His brother Anjan Gogoi ex-Air Marshal of Indian Air Force admitted this information in an interview to the Times of India.
Judicial career
Gogoi enrolled at the bar in 1978, and practiced at the Gauhati High Court, where he was made a Permanent Judge on 28 February 2001. He was transferred to the Punjab and Haryana High Court on 9 September 2010. He was made acting Chief Justice on 3 January 2011, following the retirement of justice Mukul Mudgal.
On 12 February 2011, Gogoi was administered the oath as Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court at a simple ceremony held at Haryana Raj Bhavan by Haryana Governor Jagannath Pahadia. Apart from the family members of Justice Gogoi and the judges of Punjab and Haryana High Court, the function was attended by Punjab governor Shivraj Patil, chief ministers of Haryana and Punjab Bhupinder Singh Hooda and Parkash Singh Badal, among others.
On 23 April 2012, he was elevated as a Judge of the Supreme Court. He was sworn in on 23 April, by Chief Justice of India S. H. Kapadia. In the swearing-in ceremony, judges and advocates of the Supreme Court, former Additional Solicitor General of India P K Goswami, Gogoi’s mother Shanti Priya Gogoi, his brother Air Marshal Anjan Gogoi, Advocate General of Arunachal Pradesh Ashok Saraf and Chairman of the Bar Council of India (Executive Committee) Apurba *ar Sarma were present, among others.
On 3 October 2018, he was appointed as Chief Justice of India, succeeding Dipak Misra. He was sworn in at Durbar Hall in Rastrapati Bhavan by President Ram Nath Kovind. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Lok Sabha Speaker Sumitra Mahajan, Home Minister Rajnath Singh, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, former Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani, former prime ministers Manmohan Singh and HD Deve Gowda were among the dignitaries who were present at Rashtrapati Bhavan's Darbar Hall for the ceremony. Gogoi’s mother, Shanti Gogoi, was also present at the ceremony, and Gogoi touched his mother’s feet to seek her blessings.
Personal life
Gogoi is married to Rupanjali Gogoi, and they have two children together, Raktim Gogoi and Rashmi Gogoi, both of whom are advocates. His daughter, Rashmi Gogoi, is married to Tanmay Mehta, who is the son of Valmiki Mehta (6 June 1959 - 1 March 2019), who was a Justice of Delhi High Court from 2009 until his death.
Gogoi has visited numerous countries, including Russia, to attend the Conference of Chief Justices, Turkey, to attend the Conference of Islamic Countries, Indonesia, U.K, France, Germany and the Netherlands.
He is one of the 63 individuals in India under the Z plus security cover provided by the Central Reserve Police Force.
Significant judgments and orders
On arbitration
A judicial bench comprising Gogoi and R. Banumathi observed that the absence of arbitration agreement he introduced new laws, the court can only refer parties to arbitration with written consent of the parties. This could be only be by a joint memorandum or application, not oral consent given by counsel.
On re-*essment of income of Amitabh Bachchan
In May 2016, a bench comprising Gogoi and Prafulla C. Pant quashed a 2012 Bombay High Court order that dismissed CIT's power to re-*ess the income of Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan that he allegedly had obtained from the popular TV show, Kaun Banega Crorepati.
In October 2002, Bachchan filed returns showing income of Rs 14.99 crore for the tax *essment year 2002–03. On 31 March 2003, he filed revised returns, declaring total income for that year in which he claimed expenses at 30% ad hoc amounting to Rs 6.31 crore, showing his income at Rs 8.11 crore. In March 2005, the Income Tax Department determined his income at Rs 56.41 crore for the year.
Dismissal of pe*ion seeking a Special Investigation Team probe
Led by Gogoi, on 24 January 2018 the Supreme Court dismissed Advocate Kamini Jaiswal's pe*ion seeking a Special Investigation Team (SIT) investigation of attacks on Kanhaiya *ar, the Jawaharlal Nehru University student union leader, on 15 and 17 February 2016 at Patiala House Court while he was escorted to courtroom in a sedition case.
On Govindaswamy vs State of Kerala
Main article: Soumya murder case23-year-old Soumya, an employee of a Kochi shopping mall, was *aulted by one Govindaswamy in an empty ladies' coach of Ernakulam-Shoranur p*enger train on 1 February 2011. She was allegedly pushed off from the slow-moving train, carried to a wooded area and subsequently raped. She suc*bed to injuries at the Government Medical College Hospital, Thrissur, on 6 February 2011. Govindaswamy was sentenced to death for murder by a trial court and the order was upheld by Kerala High Court on 17 December 2013.
On 15 September 2016, the Apex Court Bench comprising Gogoi, Pant and Uday Umesh Lalit set aside the death penalty and sentenced Govindaswamy to a maximum of life imprisonment for rape and other offences of causing bodily injuries.
However, to hold that the accused is liable under Section 302 IPC what is required is an intention to cause death or knowledge that the act of the accused is likely to cause death. The intention of the accused in keeping the deceased in a supine position, according to P.W. 64, was for the purposes of the sexual *ault. The requisite knowledge that in the cir*stances such an act may cause death, also, cannot be attributed to the accused, inasmuch as, the evidence of P.W. 64 itself is to the effect that such knowledge and information is, in fact, parted with in the course of training of medical and para-medical staff. The fact that the deceased survived for a couple of days after the incident and eventually died in Hospital would also clearly militate against any intention of the accused to cause death by the act of keeping the deceased in a supine position. Therefore, in the totality of the facts discussed above, the accused cannot be held liable for injury no.2. Similarly, in keeping the deceased in a supine position, intention to cause death or knowledge that such actions may cause death, cannot be attributed to the accused. We are, accordingly, of the view that the offence under Section 302 IPC cannot be held to be made out against the accused so as to make him liable therefor. Rather, we are of the view that the acts of *ault, etc. attributable to the accused would more appropriately attract the offence under Section 325 IPC. We accordingly find the accused-appellant guilty of the said offence and sentence him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for commission of the same......While the conviction under Section 376 IPC, Section 394 read with Section 397 IPC and Section 447 IPC and the sentences imposed for commission of the said offences are maintained, the conviction under Section 302 IPC is set aside...
Following the judgement of setting aside the death sentence of the accused in the said Govindaswamy vs State Of Kerala case, Justice Rajan Gogoi and his bench were severely criticized by members of the public, members of the media, political leaders including Chief Minister of Kerala, Pinarayi Vijayan, Law Minister of Kerala, A.K. Balan, Senior CPI(M) leader V. S. Achuthanandan, and jurists including Supreme Court lawyer Kaleeswaram Raj and Supreme Court Justice (retd) Markandey Katju.
In a blog entry on 17 September, retired judge Markandey Katju described the Supreme Court's verdict as a "grave error" not expected of "judges who had been in the legal world for decades". He criticised the Bench for believing "hearsay evidence" that Soumya jumped off the train instead of being pushed out by Govindaswamy:
Even a student of law in a law college knows this elementary principle that hearsay evidence is inadmissible.
In response, the SC bench led by Justice Rajan Gogoi decided to convert that blog by Justice Markandey Katju into a review pe*ion and asked him to personally appear in court to debate. On 11 November 2016, he appeared in the court and submitted his arguments. The Court then dictated the order rejecting the review pe*ion and issued contempt of court notice to him stating that "Prima facie, the statements made seem to be an attack on the Judges and not on the judgment". On 6 January 2017, the Supreme Court accepted Katju's apology and closed the contempt proceedings against him.
On people who are originally inhabitants of the state of *am
On 5 December 2017, while disposing of a Writ Pe*ion (Civil) No. 1020 of 2017, Kamalakhya Dey Purkayastha & Others Versus Union of India & Others clubbed with similar other pe*ions seeking clarification as to the meaning of people who are originally inhabitants of the state of *am, a term which appears in a schedule to the Citizenship (Registration Of Citizens And Issue Of National Iden*y Cards) Rules, 2003 pertaining to special provision as to manner of preparation of National Register of Indian Citizen in state of *am, the bench comprising Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Rohinton Fali Nariman observed that
The exercise of upgradation of NRC is not intended to be one of identification and determination of who are original inhabitants of the State of *am..... Citizens who are originally inhabitants/residents of the State of *am and those who are not are at par for inclusion in the NRC.
The National Register of Indian Citizens or in short the NRC, at its root, comprises all the Local Registers of Indian Citizens containing details of Indian citizens usually residing in a village or rural area or town or ward or demarcated area (demarcated by the Registrar General of Citizen Registration) within a ward in a town or urban area.
The Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Iden*y Card) Rules, 2003 were amended in November 2009 and March 2010 for preparation of National Register of Citizens by inviting applications from all the residents in *am for updation of the old National Register of Citizens (NRC) 1951 in *am based on relevant records. In order to undertake updating of NRC in all districts of *am, pilot projects for updating of NRC in two blocks (one each in Kamrup and Barpeta districts) were started in June 2010. Subsequently, pilot projects were stopped due to law and order problems. A second attempt to update the register for *am was made by the Government of India through issuing a Gazette Notification in December 2013.
On 17 December 2014, the bench comprising Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Rohinton Fali Nariman mandated the Government of India to complete the finalization of final updated NRC for the entire state of *am by 1 January 2016.
Gogoi being greeted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi after his swearing-in ceremony at Rashtrapati Bhavan in New Delhi on 3 October 2018Rafale Deal
See also: Rafale deal controversyOn 14 November 2019, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, comprising of Gogoi, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice K.M. Joseph dismissed pe*ions seeking a review of the 14 December 2018 judgement upholding the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter aircraft.
Ayodhya dispute
On 9 November 2019, Ranjan Gogoi and four other Supreme Court judges (Justices Sharad Arvind Bobde, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S. Abdul Nazeer) pronounced the verdict regarding the Ayodhya Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid *le dispute case. After 40 days of daily hearings from 6 August, the five-judge bench unanimously decided in favour of awarding the land to the Hindu side to build a Lord Rama temple in the place.
This was his last case before retirement on 17 November 2019.
Member of Rajya Sabha
Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi was nominated to the Rajya Sabha by President Ram Nath Kovind. On 19 March 2020, he took oath of office as a Member of Parliament in Rajya Sabha in presence of Chairman of Rajya Sabha.
Controversies
2018 Supreme Court crisis
On 12 January 2018, Ranjan Gogoi and three other Supreme Court judges - Jasti Chelameswar, Madan Lokur and Kurian Joseph - became the first to hold a press conference. They alleged problems plaguing the court, in terms of failure in the justice delivery system and allocation of cases and told journalists that the press conference was prompted by the issue of allocating to Justice Arun Mishra, the case of the death of special Central Bureau of Investigation, Judge B.H.Loya. Loya, was a special CBI judge who had died in December 2014. Justice Loya was hearing the Sohrabuddin Sheikh case of 2004, in which police officers and BJP chief Amit Shah are named. Later, Mishra recused himself from the case. Chelameswar retired on 30 June 2018, leaving Gogoi as the second senior-most judge of the Supreme Court, followed by Lokur and Joseph. Notwithstanding his seniority ranking, the Chief Justice of India, Dipak Misra, recommended Gogoi as his successor.
2019 Sexual Har*ment Allegations
In April 2019, Gogoi was accused of sexual har*ment by a former Supreme Court employee who filed affidavits stating that the Chief Justice had sexually har*ed her on 10–11 October 2018 by pressing his body against hers against her will. Gogoi rejected the allegations and described it as a conspiratorial attempt to hamper the independence of the judiciary.
A three-judge internal investigation committee cleared him, a month later. The proceedings were severely criticized by several eminent activists, personalities from legal fraternity and two retired justices of the Supreme Court.
A student Surbhi Karwa, who topped Master of Laws in National Law University, Delhi skipped her convocation to avoid receiving her degree from Gogoi in protest. She told Indian Express that 'Everything I learnt in the cl*room put me in a moral quandary over the last few weeks on whether I should receive the award from CJI Gogoi. The ins*ution he heads failed when sexual har*ment allegations were made against him'. The National Law University Delhi refuted her skipping of convocation as rubbish and as University 'highly perturbed over this instance as it has caused an unnecessary inconvenience to the Chief Justice of India'. The in house committee which quickly cleared Gogoi of sexual har*ment was chaired by Justice S A Bobde, who himself succeeded Gogoi as Chief Justice. Following this, the woman complainant stated that she was terrified by the systematic victimisation of her family members who were all dismissed from service following her protest against Gogoi's sexual advances. In June 2019, the husband and brother-in-law were reinstated.
In July 2021, Project Pegasus revealed that 11 phone numbers *ociated with this lady and her immediate family are also allegedly found on a database indicating the possibility of their phones being snooped.
See also
- List of nominated members of the Rajya Sabha
- List of current members of the Rajya Sabha
References
External links
- Media related to Ranjan Gogoi at Wikimedia Commons