Historic First in India: Four Women Chief Justices to Lead High Courts Simultaneously The Indian judiciary is set to mark a historic milestone as four women will simultaneously serve as chief justices of high courts for the first time in the country’s legal history. This unprecedented development comes as the Supreme Court Collegium has approved the appointment of Justice Meenakshi M. Ray to the Patna High Court, replacing Justice Sanghamitra Kumar Sahu, who is set to retire on June 4. The move will result in four women holding the position of chief justice across four high courts at the same time, a rare occurrence in the nation’s legal system. Currently, Justice Sunitha Agarwal leads the Gujarat High Court, Justice Revti Mohite Deré presides over the Meghalaya High Court, and Justice Leesa Gill oversees the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Supreme Court’s Collegium, led by Chief Justice Suryakant, has recommended Justice Ray for the Patna High Court, a position previously held by Justice Sahu. The Collegium’s approval was announced on May 22, 2026, paving the way for Justice Ray to assume her new role. This landmark decision underscores the growing representation of women in India’s judiciary, a sector historically dominated by men. While the exact timeline for the implementation of these appointments has not been specified, the simultaneous leadership of four women in high courts represents a significant step toward gender parity in the legal profession. The retirement of Justice Sahu on June 4 will officially trigger the transition, ensuring the new chief justice takes charge in the coming weeks. The appointment of Justice Ray to the Patna High Court is particularly notable, as it marks her first major judicial assignment at the high court level.#india #patna_high_court #meenakshi_m_ray #supreme_court_collegium #sunitha_agarwal
Patna High Court Frees Five Convicts, Slams Trial Judge for Verdict The Patna High Court has acquitted five individuals serving life sentences for a murder in Sheikhpura district, criticizing the trial judge for procedural lapses and legal misinterpretations. The court ordered the judicial officer to undergo specialized training and revoked his authority to conduct criminal trials, citing significant violations of legal standards. The verdict, delivered by a division bench of Justices Bibek Chaudhuri and Chandra Shekhar Jha, emphasized that the conviction relied on inadmissible evidence, undermining the fairness of the original trial. The case involves the alleged murder of Ujjwal Rai, a junior engineer working under the MGNREGA scheme, in Sheikhpura district. On January 17, 2017, Sunil Kumar and four others were arrested for the crime. The police lodged a First Information Report (FIR) at the Sheikhpura police station, leading to a trial that concluded on July 22, 2019. The trial judge, then serving as First Additional Sessions Judge of Sheikhpura, convicted the appellants of murder and sentenced them to life imprisonment. The High Court’s review of the case revealed critical flaws in the trial process. The judges stated that the judicial officer’s reliance on evidence deemed “inadmissible” under the law of evidence rendered the conviction invalid. The court highlighted the lack of proper legal procedures and the misapplication of legal principles during the trial. This decision underscores the importance of adherence to legal standards in criminal proceedings and the consequences of judicial misconduct. The acquittal was supported by the defense team, including lawyers Pratik Mishra and Rajesh Singh, who exposed the legal violations committed by the trial judge.#sunil_kumar #patna_high_court #sheikhpura_district #mgnrega_scheme #ujjwal_rai
Patna High Court Rules Against Blanket Denial of Public Employment Based on FIR Implication The Patna High Court recently ruled that denying public employment to individuals named in a First Information Report (FIR) is unjust and violates constitutional principles of equality and fairness. The court emphasized that such denials cannot be based on untested allegations or the mere pendency of a criminal case, stressing that formal charges must be established before any action is taken against candidates. The case centered on a group of petitioners who had successfully cleared the selection process for a public service commission exam. They had participated in re-examinations on July 19 and 20, 2024, and scored above the required cut-off. Despite this, the Bihar Public Service Commission marked their results as "in abeyance" due to their involvement in an alleged examination paper leak case, Economic Offence P.S. Case No. 06/2024. The petitioners argued that the Commission’s decision to withhold their results was an unauthorized application of the sealed cover procedure, which is typically used to suspend decisions pending formal charges. The Commission defended its actions, stating that the marked results were an administrative measure to preserve the integrity of the recruitment process. It claimed that several candidates implicated in the case had appeared in re-examinations and that legal advice prompted the decision to defer results. The Commission also noted that the petitioners had been charge-sheeted under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and other relevant laws, including Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, and 34 IPC, as well as provisions of the Bihar Conduct of Examinations Act and the Information Technology Act.#patna_high_court #bihar_public_service_commission #economic_offence_p_s_case #monu_kumar #shivani_mishra
Patna High Court Rules National Highway Act Takes Precedence Over Waqf Act in Land Dispute The Patna High Court has overturned an injunction issued by the Bihar State Waqf Tribunal, which had blocked the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) from constructing highways on land designated as a mosque and Kabristan. The court ruled that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 to interfere with land acquisition for national highways. The decision emphasized that the Tribunal failed to properly interpret the law and appeared to prioritize community interests over legal principles. Justice Bibek Chaudhuri, presiding over the case, stated that the Tribunal did not adequately consider the National Highways Act, 1956 and the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995. He clarified that the National Highways Act, being a central legislation under Entry 23 of List-I of the Constitution, takes precedence over the Waqf Act, which falls under Entry 28 of List-III. The court argued that the Waqf Act’s purpose is to manage waqf properties, not to obstruct infrastructure projects. The court rejected the Tribunal’s claim that the acquisition of land for highways violated the Waqf Act. It noted that Section 91 of the Waqf Act only requires notice to the Waqf Board and does not prohibit land acquisition. The ruling highlighted that the National Highways Act provides a comprehensive framework for land acquisition, including notification, objection processes, and compensation. The court also referenced a prior order from the High Court, which had already permitted NHAI to proceed with construction on the disputed plots. This effectively invalidated the Tribunal’s stay order.#national_highways_authority_of_india #patna_high_court #bihar_state_waqf_tribunal #national_highways_act_1956 #syed_mohammad_masood_jawed
Waqf Tribunal Cannot Stall Highway Projects: Patna High Court Upholds Primacy of National Highways Law in Land Acquisition The Patna High Court recently ruled that the Waqf Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to halt the construction of a national highway in Bihar, affirming the supremacy of the National Highways Act, 1956 over the Waqf Act, 1995 in matters of land acquisition for public infrastructure. The case, National Highways Authority of India v. Syed Mohammad Masood Jawed, centered on a dispute over land designated as Kabristan and Masjid in Samastipur district, which the Bihar State Waqf Tribunal had previously ordered the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to avoid using for highway construction. The legal conflict arose when NHAI appealed the Tribunal’s injunction, arguing that the Waqf Tribunal’s order violated the statutory framework governing land acquisition for national highways. The appeal was filed under Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995, and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging the Tribunal’s authority to intervene in a matter governed by the National Highways Act. The Court’s decision hinged on resolving the tension between the two laws: whether the Waqf Tribunal, tasked with adjudicating disputes over Waqf properties, could legally block the acquisition of such land for public infrastructure projects. NHAI’s arguments emphasized the completeness of the National Highways Act, which provides a self-contained mechanism for land acquisition, compensation, and dispute resolution. The appellant contended that the Act’s provisions, including Section 91, do not prohibit the acquisition of Waqf property but instead outline procedures for compensation. NHAI also cited a prior ruling by the Patna High Court in Vikas Kumar v.#national_highways_authority_of_india #patna_high_court #waqf_board #waqf_act_1995 #national_highways_act_1956
Patna High Court Slams Bihar Waqf Tribunal, Clears NHAI Project: Not Acceptable The Patna High Court has strongly criticized the Bihar State Waqf Tribunal for halting a national highway project in favor of a particular community, calling such reasoning "not acceptable" for a judicial authority. The court was hearing an appeal filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) against the tribunal’s May 15, 2025 order that had restrained construction on land recorded as kabristan and masjid in Bihar’s Samastipur district. Justice Bibek Chaudhuri, who was presiding over the case, observed that the tribunal failed to appreciate the law and that its decision was influenced by the interest of a particular community. The court emphasized that this is not acceptable for a member of the Bihar Judicial Service and directed that this observation be brought to the notice of the Chief Justice. The high court criticized the tribunal’s reasoning for prioritizing the interest of a particular community. In one of the most striking portions of the judgment, the court highlighted that the tribunal’s approach was not acceptable for a judicial authority. The court also directed that this observation be placed before the Chief Justice, signaling serious concern over the tribunal’s approach. The court held that the tribunal had acted "absolutely without jurisdiction" and failed to properly appreciate the statutory scheme governing land acquisition for national highways. The court stated that the National Highways Act provides a complete and exhaustive framework for the acquisition of land for highways, and that Section 91 of the Waqf Act does not bar such acquisition. It only ensures that notice is given to the Waqf Board to enable participation in compensation proceedings.#national_highways_authority_of_india #patna_high_court #bihar_state_waqf_tribunal #waqf_act #national_highways_act
