S. H. Kapadia
Encyclopedia
Sarosh Homi Kapadia (Hindi: सरोश होमी कापडिया) (born 29 September 1947) is the thirty-eighth and current Chief Justice of India
.
The young Sarosh may not have been rich but what he did possess was ambition and determination to become a judge. He became counsel for the income tax department in 1974, aged 27. He also appeared for the then Bombay Municipal Corporation in matters concerning rateable value and octroi. He represented the Maharashtra
government and several public sector undertakings (PSUs) until he was appointed a high court judge. As a judge of the Bombay High Court, he decided matters ranging from environmental to banking, M&As, industrial disputes, tax and so on, but developed a reputation for his expertise on commercial and tax law.
The best thing that ever happened to him was the stock scam of 1999 involving broker Ketan Parekh. He was appointed judge of the special court established under the Trial of Offences Relating to Transaction in Securities Act in 1999. He played an important role in the proceedings of the Joint Parliamentary Committee constituted to investigate the stock scam.
On August 5, 2003, he was appointed Chief Justice of the Uttarakhand High Court and in December of that year, he was elevated to the Supreme Court, thus serving only a very short tenure as chief justice of a high court.
In the Supreme Court, Kapadia delivered some landmark judgements which included a decision relating to succession of property in April 30, 2005 in which he ruled out the possibility of conducting the DNA test.
He was part of the three-member Bench that decided income tax case of Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Lalu Prasad. The verdict went in favour of Prasad but Justice Kapadia gave a dissenting judgement saying the income tax department should have filed an appeal against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) order.
There are some controversies that, however, are inexplicable. Justice A P Shah of the Delhi High Court (who was part of the bench that gave the judgment on homosexuals’ rights) was to have been elevated to the Supreme Court. Kapadia’s was the chief dissenting voice in the five-member collegium that decides who should or should not move up to the Supreme Court. Some say this was because of rivalry from the days when Shah and he were judges in the Bombay High Court. Others say Kapadia was disapproving of two judgments Shah had delivered as Chief Justice of the Madras High Court.
Now, the biggest professional challenge for the man who has spent his entire life working towards becoming a judge is to decide who should scrutinise the Chief Justice of India and whether he should come under the purview of the Right to Information Act. This has far-reaching implications for both law and justice.
Kapadia is conscious that he has to uphold both equity and fairness. On the issue of honour killings, he has said justice by khaps (local communities) is a social not a legal matter. On the other hand, throughout his life, he has ruled in favour of tribals and the dispossessed.
India’s legal establishment is weighed down by work, and central issues like police reform have temporarily taken a back seat. Crusading judges have their drawbacks, but Kapadia has the advantage of being utterly focussed. Hopefully, the legal system will benefit from this.
. Kapadia joined Gagrat & Co, a law firm, as a clerk and later went on to work with Feroze Damania who was a highly respected "firebrand" labour lawyer . However his zeal to achieve inspired him to join the legal profession and he became an advocate. He joined as an advocate in the Bombay High Court
on 10 September 1974.
He was appointed as an additional judge of the Bombay High Court on 8 October 1991 and on 23 March 1993 he was appointed as a permanent judge. On 5 August 2003 he became the Chief Justice of the Uttaranchal High Court. On 18 December 2003 he was appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court
. On 12 May 2010 he was sworn in as the Chief Justice of India by the President
Pratibha Patil
. He is due to retire on 29.09.2012 (F.N.)
His wish was granted in October 1991, when he was made a judge of the Bombay High Court. The story of how he reached there is nothing less than remarkable.
,
P.J. Thomas, made by the High Power Committee comprising Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
, Home Minister P. Chidambaram
and Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj
(dissenting). The judgment caused severe embarrassment for the Government and made Manmohan Singh admit the error in appointment. While the judgement was welcomed by most media pundits , some experts have expressed concerns of miscarriage of justice. Former IAS officer, S. M. Murshed writes, 'the ratio decidendi
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
is a bit difficult to comprehend, for, in the last analysis, the entire case against Thomas rested on a solitary, misconceived FIR
which was filed as an afterthought and which should never have been filed. Given the facts, Manmohan Singh did no substantive wrong and he did not commit any error (in appointing Thomas).' .
Chief Justice of India
The Chief Justice of India is the highest-ranking judge in the Supreme Court of India, and thus holds the highest judicial position in India. As well as presiding in the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice also head its administrative functions....
.
Early life
S. H. Kapadia belonged to a gentle lower middle-class Parsi family from the Khetwadi-Girgaum region of Bombay. His father was a clerk in a defence establishment, his mother a homemaker. There was enough to eat, but barely. Kapadia completed his BA and LLB and immediately began working. Higher education would have been a luxury.He acknowledged his humble beginnings in a letter he wrote to Justice V R Krishna Iyer recently. “I come from a poor family. I started my career as a class IV employee and the only asset I possess is integrity...” he said. He joined Gagrat & Co, a law firm as a clerk and later, went to work for firebrand and highly respected labour lawyer Feroze Damania. Soon after, the family moved to Andheri. There, in the neighbouring building lived a young girl, Shahnaz, with whom Kapadia fell in love. She became Mrs Kapadia. They were to have two sons.The young Sarosh may not have been rich but what he did possess was ambition and determination to become a judge. He became counsel for the income tax department in 1974, aged 27. He also appeared for the then Bombay Municipal Corporation in matters concerning rateable value and octroi. He represented the Maharashtra
Maharashtra
Maharashtra is a state located in India. It is the second most populous after Uttar Pradesh and third largest state by area in India...
government and several public sector undertakings (PSUs) until he was appointed a high court judge. As a judge of the Bombay High Court, he decided matters ranging from environmental to banking, M&As, industrial disputes, tax and so on, but developed a reputation for his expertise on commercial and tax law.
The best thing that ever happened to him was the stock scam of 1999 involving broker Ketan Parekh. He was appointed judge of the special court established under the Trial of Offences Relating to Transaction in Securities Act in 1999. He played an important role in the proceedings of the Joint Parliamentary Committee constituted to investigate the stock scam.
On August 5, 2003, he was appointed Chief Justice of the Uttarakhand High Court and in December of that year, he was elevated to the Supreme Court, thus serving only a very short tenure as chief justice of a high court.
In the Supreme Court, Kapadia delivered some landmark judgements which included a decision relating to succession of property in April 30, 2005 in which he ruled out the possibility of conducting the DNA test.
He was part of the three-member Bench that decided income tax case of Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Lalu Prasad. The verdict went in favour of Prasad but Justice Kapadia gave a dissenting judgement saying the income tax department should have filed an appeal against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) order.
There are some controversies that, however, are inexplicable. Justice A P Shah of the Delhi High Court (who was part of the bench that gave the judgment on homosexuals’ rights) was to have been elevated to the Supreme Court. Kapadia’s was the chief dissenting voice in the five-member collegium that decides who should or should not move up to the Supreme Court. Some say this was because of rivalry from the days when Shah and he were judges in the Bombay High Court. Others say Kapadia was disapproving of two judgments Shah had delivered as Chief Justice of the Madras High Court.
Now, the biggest professional challenge for the man who has spent his entire life working towards becoming a judge is to decide who should scrutinise the Chief Justice of India and whether he should come under the purview of the Right to Information Act. This has far-reaching implications for both law and justice.
Kapadia is conscious that he has to uphold both equity and fairness. On the issue of honour killings, he has said justice by khaps (local communities) is a social not a legal matter. On the other hand, throughout his life, he has ruled in favour of tribals and the dispossessed.
India’s legal establishment is weighed down by work, and central issues like police reform have temporarily taken a back seat. Crusading judges have their drawbacks, but Kapadia has the advantage of being utterly focussed. Hopefully, the legal system will benefit from this.
Career
S. H. Kapadia started his career as a class IV employee. He later became a law clerk with a lawyer's office in MumbaiMumbai
Mumbai , formerly known as Bombay in English, is the capital of the Indian state of Maharashtra. It is the most populous city in India, and the fourth most populous city in the world, with a total metropolitan area population of approximately 20.5 million...
. Kapadia joined Gagrat & Co, a law firm, as a clerk and later went on to work with Feroze Damania who was a highly respected "firebrand" labour lawyer . However his zeal to achieve inspired him to join the legal profession and he became an advocate. He joined as an advocate in the Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court at Mumbai, Maharashtra, is the High Court of India with jurisdiction over the states of Maharashtra & Goa, and, the Union Territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli...
on 10 September 1974.
He was appointed as an additional judge of the Bombay High Court on 8 October 1991 and on 23 March 1993 he was appointed as a permanent judge. On 5 August 2003 he became the Chief Justice of the Uttaranchal High Court. On 18 December 2003 he was appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court
Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial forum and final court of appeal as established by Part V, Chapter IV of the Constitution of India...
. On 12 May 2010 he was sworn in as the Chief Justice of India by the President
President of India
The President of India is the head of state and first citizen of India, as well as the Supreme Commander of the Indian Armed Forces. President of India is also the formal head of all the three branches of Indian Democracy - Legislature, Executive and Judiciary...
Pratibha Patil
Pratibha Patil
Pratibha Devisingh Patil is the 12th President of the Republic of India and first woman to hold the office. She was sworn in as President of India on 25 July 2007, succeeding Dr. A.P.J...
. He is due to retire on 29.09.2012 (F.N.)
Personal life
S. H. Kapadia is married to Shahnaz and has a son who is a Chartered Accountant and a daughter. He has keen interest in Economics, Public Finance, Theoretical Physics and Hindu and Buddhist Philosophies.Sarosh Homi Kapadia, Chief Justice of India, has few interests other than the law. One of them is going for walks. As a young man, Kapadia used to drag his younger brother (now a retired banker) all over Mumbai for walks that would, almost invariably, end at Narayan Dabholkar Road, the breezy avenue off Napean Sea Road where high court judges have their apartments. The two brothers would look at the buildings and young Sarosh would say: “One day, the name on that nameplate will be mine”.His wish was granted in October 1991, when he was made a judge of the Bombay High Court. The story of how he reached there is nothing less than remarkable.
Notable Judgments
On March 3, 2011, the three member bench headed by Kapadia, quashed the appointment of Chief Vigilance CommissionerCentral Vigilance Commission
Central Vigilance Commission is an apex Indian governmental body created in 1964 to address governmental corruption. It has the status of an autonomous body, free of control from any executive authority, charged with monitoring all vigilance activity under the Central Government of India, and...
,
P.J. Thomas, made by the High Power Committee comprising Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
Manmohan Singh
Manmohan Singh is the 13th and current Prime Minister of India. He is the only Prime Minister since Jawaharlal Nehru to return to power after completing a full five-year term. A Sikh, he is the first non-Hindu to occupy the office. Singh is also the 7th Prime Minister belonging to the Indian...
, Home Minister P. Chidambaram
P. Chidambaram
P. Chidambaram or Chidambaram Palaniappan, sometimes written Palaniappan Chidambaram is an Indian politician with the Indian National Congress and present Union Minister of Home Affairs of the Republic of India. Previously he was the Finance Minister of India from May 2004 to November 2008...
and Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj
Sushma Swaraj
Sushma Swaraj is an Indian politician of the Bharatiya Janata Party and Member of Parliament. She is currently the Leader of the Opposition in the 15th Lok Sabha. She is a former union cabinet minister of India and a former Chief Minister of Delhi. Also she served as the Chairperson of the BJP's...
(dissenting). The judgment caused severe embarrassment for the Government and made Manmohan Singh admit the error in appointment. While the judgement was welcomed by most media pundits , some experts have expressed concerns of miscarriage of justice. Former IAS officer, S. M. Murshed writes, 'the ratio decidendi
Ratio decidendi
Ratio decidendi is a Latin phrase meaning "the reason" or "the rationale for the decision." The ratio decidendi is "[t]he point in a case which determines the judgment" or "the principle which the case establishes."...
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
Supreme court
A supreme court is the highest court within the hierarchy of many legal jurisdictions. Other descriptions for such courts include court of last resort, instance court, judgment court, high court, or apex court...
is a bit difficult to comprehend, for, in the last analysis, the entire case against Thomas rested on a solitary, misconceived FIR
FIR
FIR or fir may refer to:*fir, a type of conifer tree*USCGC Fir, either of two buoy tenders of the United States Coast Guard*Fir , free ideal ring -Acronyms:* Falling In Reverse, a post-hardcore band...
which was filed as an afterthought and which should never have been filed. Given the facts, Manmohan Singh did no substantive wrong and he did not commit any error (in appointing Thomas).' .