Amid Student Protests, SC Judge Urges Activation of Article 124(3) for Academic Appointments
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan urges use of Article 124(3) to appoint distinguished jurists to the Supreme Court, highlighting academic diversity.
Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Sunday pushed for the activation of a long-dormant constitutional provision that allows the appointment of 'distinguished jurists' to the apex court. Speaking at the 13th convocation of the 2026 LLM batch at the National Law University, Delhi, he noted that despite the Constitution being in force for over 76 years, no jurist has ever been appointed to the Supreme Court under Article 124(3).
Justice Bhuyan's remarks come at a time when student bodies in premier national law universities have objected to Chief Justice of India's recent oral comments and refused to invite him to their convocations. The Bar Council of India had earlier ordered state bar councils to block the enrolment of NALSAR's 2026 batch for objecting to the CJI's presence, a move it later withdrew following public pressure.
Addressing the broader context, Justice Bhuyan stressed that the ability to tolerate disagreement is as vital as the freedom to question. "A democratic society cannot be built on the edifice that everyone will think alike," he said, adding that tolerance is a constitutional value, not merely a matter of personal courtesy. He asserted that democracy becomes meaningful when different voices can coexist and be treated with dignity.
The judge suggested that the 76-year reluctance to use Article 124(3) may stem from a perception that Indian academia lacks depth, or that the provision was simply not taken seriously. He dismissed the argument that legal academics lack practical experience as a "shallow objection," noting that the Supreme Court serves as the moral, legal, and constitutional conscience keeper of the nation, above technicalities.
Justice Bhuyan also clarified that the term 'jurist' in the context of Article 124(3) extends beyond lawyers and judges of repute, encompassing persons skilled or knowledgeable in law. He argued that appointing renowned legal scholars would bring a defining impact to the court's judicial functioning, enriching decision-making at the highest level.