- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Central Government notifies appointment of Three Advocates as Additional Judges of Bombay High Court
Central Government notifies appointment of Three Advocates as Additional Judges of Bombay High Court
The Central Government has notified the appointment of three additional judges for the Bombay High Court. Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal confirmed the appointment via official Twitter handle.
The three advocates are:
a) Shailesh Pramod Brahme
b) Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla
c) Jitendra Shantilal Jain
The appointment was made pursuant to the recommendation made by the Supreme Court Collegium on 2nd May.
As per the Collegium resolution, the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court had made the recommendation for the elevation of these three lawyers on 26 September, 2022.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court last month had overruled Intelligence Bureau’s objection concerning an article wrote in 2020 by Pooniwalla’s senior expressing concerns over the state of freedom of speech and expression in the country.
Thereafter, on April 26, 2023, the file concerning these recommendations was forwarded by the Department of Justice to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court Collegium noted that the Chief Ministers and the Governors of the States of Maharashtra and Goa have concurred with the recommendations.
The notification issued in this regard stated, “In exercise of the power conferred by clause (1) of Article 224 of the Constitution of India, the President is pleased to appoint S/Shri (i) Shailesh Pramod Brahme, (ii) Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla and (iii) Jitendra Shantilal Jain as Additional Judges of the Bombay High Court for a period of two years, in that order of seniority, with effect from the date they assume charge of their respective offices.”
The Bombay High Court currently has 40 permanent judges and 23 additional judges. With three new additional judges, it will function with a strength of 94 judges.