Full Name: Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai (B. R. Gavai)
Date of Birth: 24 November 1960
Place of Birth: Amravati, Maharashtra, India
Family Background:
Father: R. S. Gavai – a prominent politician, Ambedkarite, social activist; also served as Governor in various states.
Mother: Kamaltai Gavai, a schoolteacher.
Early Schooling: Municipal school in Amravati; then Chikitsak Samuha Madhyamik Shala (Girgaon, Mumbai); Holy Name High School in Colaba, Mumbai.
Higher Education: B.Com (Commerce) and LL.B (Law) from Amravati University.
B. R. Gavai Enrolment as Lawyer: Enrolled as an advocate on 16 March 1985.
Age: Born in 1960 → as of 2025, ~64–65 years old.
Beliefs, Judicial Philosophy & Style — Justice B. R. Gavai
1. Primacy of the Constitution
He measures every statute, policy and official act against the Constitution. The Constitution is his first and final reference point.
2. Commitment to social justice
Rooted in Ambedkarite values from his upbringing, he is committed to protecting the rights and dignity of historically disadvantaged groups.
3. Procedural integrity is essential
He insists the government must follow proper legal steps. Even measures with public support (for example, on-the-spot demolitions) require lawful process and safeguards.
4. Solution-oriented and practical
He favours legal outcomes that are workable in everyday life — tests and remedies that secure rights while enabling legitimate public policy.
5. Harmonising rights with public interest
He seeks a balanced approach: upholding fundamental freedoms but also weighing wider constitutional aims like welfare and public safety.
6. Compassion informed by personal history
His modest early schooling and family background give him an instinctive empathy for ordinary citizens and the obstacles they face in accessing courts.
7. Measured restraint, decisive when needed
He respects the division of powers and avoids unnecessary conflict with other branches, yet he will convene and lead large benches on major constitutional questions when the situation demands.
8. Clear, accessible courtroom language
He uses plain speech and familiar examples so that decisions are understandable to laypeople rather than wrapped in dense legalese.
9. Upholds the dignity of institutions
He defends courtroom decorum, judicial independence and institutional integrity, and responds firmly to attempts that threaten them.
10. Making justice reachable
He promotes steps that reduce distance between courts and citizens — better outreach, circuit benches and removing procedural hurdles that keep people away.
11. Holding powerful actors answerable
He believes those who abuse public power — whether elected officials, administrators or private developers — must be held legally responsible for harms to the public interest.
12. Wary of snap judgments driven by social media
He cautions against hurried reactions to short clips or posts; he stresses careful reporting and measured public responses when court remarks circulate online.
Legal & Judicial Career Progression
Early Practice:
Early practice under Raja S. Bhonsale (former Advocate General / High Court Judge) till about 1987; then independent practice in Bombay High Court (1987–1990), then mainly at Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court.
Areas: Constitutional law, administrative law, etc.
Public Posts / Prosecution Work:
Assistant Government Pleader & Additional Public Prosecutor at the Nagpur Bench (Aug 1992 to July 1993); later Government Pleader & Public Prosecutor in Nagpur Bench (from 17 Jan 2000).
High Court Judge (Bombay HC):
Appointed Additional Judge on 14 November 2003; made Permanent Judge on 12 November 2005. Bench assignments included Bombay principal seat, and benches at Nagpur, Aurangabad, Panaji.
Supreme Court Judge:
Elevated on 24 May 2019 as judge of the Supreme Court of India.
Chief Justice of India:
Took oath as the 52nd Chief Justice of India on 14 May 2025; will retire on 23 November 2025.
Time as Supreme Court judge: From 24 May 2019 till date (2025) → ~6 years.
Tenure as CJI: From 14 May 2025 to 23 November 2025 → just over 6 months.
Judicial Work / Judgments / Bench Experience
Number of Benches: In his time in the Supreme Court (about six years), he has been part of around 700 benches, covering many legal domains.
Number of Judgments Authored: Around 300 judgments including those by Constitution Benches.
Subject Areas Covered: Constitutional / administrative law, civil law, criminal law, commercial disputes, arbitration law, education, environmental law, electricity law etc.
Landmark Cases / Some Important Judgments
1. Article 370 abrogation case
He was part of the Constitution Bench that upheld the central government’s decision to abrogate Article 370 for Jammu & Kashmir.
Case details: Article 370 of the Constitution — December 11, 2023.
Bench: CJI D. Y. Chandrachud, Justices S. K. Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B. R. Gavai, Surya Kant.
Quote: “The Constitution is not a vault; it is a compass.”
2. Electoral Bonds Scheme
Part of Bench that struck down the scheme, holding it compromised transparency and citizens’ right to information.
Case details: Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, February 15, 2024 — 2024 INSC 113.
Bench: Chandrachud, Khanna, Gavai, J. B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra.
Quote: “Law without procedure is a promise without a path.”
3. Demonetisation decisions
He was part of a five-judge Constitution Bench which upheld demonetisation, declaring it proportionate to objectives.
Quote: “Justice should be spoken plainly so everyone can listen.”
4. Bulldozer demolitions / arbitrary state action
He has been part of judgments stressing that demolitions without due process are unconstitutional.
Case details: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures — November 2024.
Quote: “Holding power to account is the heart of public law.”
5. Pune Forest Land / “nexus” case (first verdict as CJI)
On his first day as CJI, he led a bench declaring illegal allotment of forest land in Pune and exposed the nexus between politicians, bureaucrats, and builders.
Case details: Supreme Court order on Pune’s forest land allotment — May 15, 2025.
Quote: “Courtrooms must be bridges, not barricades, between people and justice.”
Main Controversy: “Shoe-Throwing” Incident and Subsequent Reactions
1. What Occurred
On October 6, 2025, during a hearing in Court No. 1 of the Supreme Court, a 71-year-old advocate named Rakesh Kishore reportedly removed his shoe and attempted to throw it towards Chief Justice B. R. Gavai.
The outburst was believed to be triggered by the CJI’s earlier remarks in a case related to a Lord Vishnu idol in Khajuraho.
As security restrained him, the lawyer shouted slogans such as “Sanatan ka apmaan nahi sahenge” (“We will not tolerate disrespect to Sanatan Dharma”).
2. Background / Cause of the Incident
The spark came from a petition demanding reconstruction of a seven-foot Vishnu idol at the Javari Temple in Khajuraho.
The bench headed by CJI Gavai dismissed the plea, describing it as a “publicity-interest litigation.”
During the hearing, he reportedly made a light-hearted remark: “If you are such a strong devotee, go and pray to the deity to act.”
This remark spread on social media and was interpreted by some as mocking religious faith.
CJI Gavai later clarified that his statement was taken out of context and that he holds deep respect for all religions.
3. Immediate Developments
The Supreme Court Bar Association and Bar Council of India strongly condemned the incident.
The BCI suspended the lawyer’s licence and initiated disciplinary proceedings.
Police questioned the advocate for several hours but released him later, as no FIR was initially registered.
4. Chief Justice Gavai’s Response
He remained calm during the incident and said, “Please don’t be distracted; such acts do not bother me.”
Later, he clarified that his comments were misquoted online and reiterated his respect for all religions.
5. Legal and Institutional Actions
BCI suspended the advocate’s licence pending further inquiry.
Police in multiple states registered FIRs under provisions related to obstructing a public servant.
Punjab Police also filed cases against social media handles spreading caste-based hate against the CJI.
6. Criticisms and Counter-Arguments
Critics’ View: Some groups alleged that the CJI’s remarks undermined Hindu beliefs.
Supporters’ Stand: Legal fraternity defended him, saying his comments were distorted and judicial independence must be protected.
7. Courtroom Security and Administrative Measures
Security officers acted swiftly, preventing the shoe from being thrown.
Following the event, CJI Gavai met senior court and security officials to review courtroom safety protocols.
Other Related Issues
1. Misreporting and Social-Media Misrepresentation
The earlier “Go ask the deity” comment circulated widely online, with users calling it disrespectful.
However, Justice Gavai clarified that his words were twisted and taken out of context.
2. “Protocol Violation” PIL in Maharashtra
A PIL filed in Maharashtra alleged protocol violations during CJI Gavai’s state visit.
The bench led by him dismissed the plea as “publicity-seeking,” noting that judicial time should not be wasted on trivial matters.