1) What made you decide to study law? Was it a natural choice or a leap of faith?
Justice Kant: Choosing to study law was a decision shaped by a blend of passion, curiosity, and a desire to create impact. From an early age, I was drawn to debates and enjoyed dissecting social issues, which naturally inclined me towards the study of law. I felt like it was not just an academic pursuit, but an extension of my personal strengths and interests. Of course, it was also a leap of faith. Law is a demanding field that requires years of commitment, adaptability, and resilience. I had to trust that my passion would endure the rigorous workload and that I could navigate the uncertainty of such a competitive profession. Choosing law meant accepting the responsibility of shaping my own path in a discipline that is as challenging as it is rewarding.
2) 21 years into judgeship, how do you deal with the human side of judging -- when the law may demand one thing, but conscience tugs another way?
Justice Kant: After 21 years on the bench, I have come to understand that the human side of judging is both inevitable and essential. The law provides the framework, precedent, and structure that ensure fairness across cases, but every decision also involves human stories, emotions, and struggles. When conscience tugs in one direction and the law points in another, my approach is to first acknowledge that tension rather than suppress it. I begin by grounding myself in the law, and simultaneously look for lawful ways to honour the human realities in front of me- whether through the careful selection of remedies, or using discretion where the law allows it. Ultimately, I accept that my duty is to apply the law as faithfully as possible, but I strive to do so with compassion, clarity, and respect for the people whose lives are affected. It is a balance: the law keeps me steady, and my conscience ensures that I never forget the humanity behind the cases I decide.
3) How would you describe your philosophy of justice -- textual, purposive, or humanistic? Do you believe judges should be social reformers or neutral interpreters?
Justice Kant: My philosophy of justice leans toward a humanistic approach, though it incorporates elements of both textual and purposive interpretation. I believe that the ultimate goal of the law is to serve the people and uphold their dignity while maintaining fairness and consistency. While textual interpretation ensures adherence to the rule of law, and purposive interpretation seeks to honour legislative intent, a humanistic philosophy allows for balancing these aspects with empathy and practical realities. Regarding the role of judges, I believe they should primarily act as neutral interpreters of the law while remaining conscious of the broader social context. Judges must ensure that justice is applied fairly, without covert personal bias or overt social engineering. This means a judge does not necessarily become a social reformer but can indirectly influence progress by interpreting the law in ways that align with constitutional principles and human welfare.
4) You have been a chief justice of high courts and have also held several administrative responsibilities. What lessons have you learned about leading within the judiciary?
Justice Kant: My tenure as the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court and my numerous administrative responsibilities have taught me several critical lessons about how to ensure that the judiciary remains ever responsive to the needs of society. Every decision of the court, whether administrative or judicial, must reinforce public trust while adhering to the highest standards of ethical integrity. Administrative experience has shown me that even small changes -- whether in procedural guidelines, court infrastructure, or digital adoption -- can have a transformative impact on justice delivery if implemented with clarity and persistence. Effective leadership in the judiciary requires a deep commitment to institution-building. Courts are not merely individual judges but collective bodies whose credibility depends on consistency, discipline, and efficiency. Streamlining case management, leveraging technology for faster disposal of cases, and fostering a culture of punctuality and preparedness among judges and staff are essential aspects of this work. Years of experience has reinforced in me that empathy and communication are indispensable. Judges and court staff face enormous pressures; listening to their concerns and motivating them fosters an environment where justice can thrive. Equally, engaging with the Bar constructively helps in maintaining the smooth functioning of the judicial process. Decades of judgeship has taught me that reform is a continuous process and my wealth of experience should hold me in good stead as I step into my new role as the Chief Justice of India.
5) You have lived and worked in several cities - Hisar, Chandigarh, Shimla, Delhi. Which one still feels most like home?
Justice Kant: Having lived and worked in Hisar, Chandigarh, Shimla, and Delhi, I've come to notice that each city, despite its unique character, shares certain commonalities. All four are deeply rooted in rich cultural traditions, where community life, local cuisine, and festivals play a central role. They also reflect a balance of modern conveniences and historical influence -- whether in the natural beauty of Shimla, the architecture of Chandigarh, the rustic charm of Hisar, or the rich heritage of Delhi. They all provide a sense of rootedness where tradition and progress coexist. Each city has shaped my perspective in its own way- Hisar grounding me in simplicity, Chandigarh teaching me exactitude, Shimla instilling appreciation for calm, and Delhi imbuing grit- together enriching the arc of my professional and personal life.
The frequency of my trips to Delhi all throughout my career has really made it a home away from home. The sense of belonging it offers as the National Capital and my familiarity with its pulse has genuinely made it a second home for me. Delhi's fast pace combines opportunity, connectivity, and a comforting familiarity, making it feel like the natural centre of my life.
6) Those close to you say you carry "the farmer's patience and the poet's empathy." How do poetry and nature shape your judicial philosophy? Do these identities still inform your worldview as a judge and as CJI?
Justice Kant: As someone who tilled the fields of Petwar from a young age, I know firsthand that a farmer's patience comes from knowing that true growth requires time, care, and resilience. This hard-earned lesson has taught me to approach each case methodically- listening carefully, weighing all evidence, and allowing the process to unfold without rushing to judgment. Justice, like a harvest, cannot be forced; it must be cultivated with diligence and respect for the natural rhythm of due process.
Meanwhile, a poet's empathy allows me to see beyond the facts on paper and recognize the human stories woven into every dispute. It compels me to consider the perspectives, struggles, and emotions of all parties involved, without surrendering to bias. In combining these identities, I have always strived to ensure that my decisions are not only legally sound but also humane, reflecting a worldview where the law serves the people, and not the other way around. Together, patience and empathy guide me to balance firmness with understanding, and principle with compassion.
7) What will be your priorities as you take the helm?
Justice Kant: One of my foremost challenges is the arrears in the Supreme Court. Today's scoreboard shows nearly 90,000 cases pending. I don't know the reason whether listing is poor or matters are multiplying. But what matters is the arrear and the foresight. My goal is optimum utilisation of force. As CJI, I have to take care of arrears on a pan-India basis. Thousands of cases are pending because the Supreme Court has not been able to take them. Many matters can't be taken up before the high courts and lower courts because related issues are pending before the Supreme Court. I will find those matters, ensure benches are constituted, and have them decided. I will also try to see the oldest matters. I need to understand reasons for pending cases and why people are coming directly to the Supreme Court. There must be some reason. Healthy practices of going to lower courts first need to be revived. High Courts are constitutional courts-they have the same power.
The second issue is mediation. We must identify a solution, and one of the easiest solutions, which can be a game changer, is mediation. We will have to persuade government agencies to come forward and pursue mediation. The opinion given by the Prime Minister on November 8 gives a positive indication of an environment building for mediation among all stakeholders.
Q: On social media, the judiciary is nowadays abused more than politics. So, do you think CJI is under pressure to have a better image on social media?
A: I don't think a judge or CJI should come under pressure. I've never dealt any such kind of pressure. In my opinion CJI in any case should not be or any judge should not be because what else do you require when you become CJI? If I didn't come under this pressure when I was a judge of the HC, chief justice of the HC or a judge of the Supreme Court, why should I be under pressure when I become the CJI?