Justice Maheshwari and Khanna sworn in as SC judges

Justice Maheshwari and Khanna sworn in as SC judges

The swearing-in ceremony took place at in Chief Justice's courtroom. The oath of office was administered to both the judges by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi.

Two judges – Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sanjiv Khanna - joined the Supreme Court here on Friday after being sworn in by the Chief Justice of India, taking the overall strength of judges to 28 against the sanctioned number of 31.

Justice Maheshwari and Justice Khanna were administered the oath of the office in Chief Justice's courtroom, amid the presence of several top court judges, lawyers and family members.

Both Justices Maheshwari and Khanna participated in the bench led by the CJI and Justice S A Bobde respectively and heard the listed cases as well.

The notifications on their appointment were issued on Wednesday, though questions were raised on Supreme Court Collegium's decision of January 10 to supersede judges in all India seniority to recommend their names for elevation.

Justice Maheshwari, who hailed from Rajasthan, stood at serial number 21 in the combined seniority of High Court judges on an all-India basis. He was appointed as a judge of the Rajasthan High Court on September 2, 2004, and was transferred to the Allahabad High Court on July 19, 2014.

He was elevated as Chief Justice of the Meghalaya High Court on February 24, 2016, before his transfer to the Karnataka High Court on February 12, 2018.

Justice Khanna stood at serial number 33 in the combined seniority of high court judges on all India basis. He was appointed as a judge of the Delhi High Court on June 24, 2005, and since then has been functioning there in the same capacity.

Justice Khanna would become the Chief Justice of India for six months and two days after the retirement of Justice D Y Chandrachud on November 10, 2024.

He is the nephew of former SC judge H R Khanna, who had resigned after being ignored to the post of the CJI despite his seniority and due to his dissenting judgement on the applicability of fundamental right to life and liberty during emergency days.