The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the names of three Advocates for appointment as Judges of the Bombay High Court. The SC Collegium also recommended the name of Justice Robin Phukan, Additional Judge, for appointment as permanent Judge of the Gauhati High Court.

The details of the recommendation made by the Collegium are given below-

Advocate Shailesh Pramod Brahme as Judge of Bombay High Court

Advocate Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla as Judge of Bombay High Court

Advocate Jitendra Shantilal Jain as Judge of Bombay High Court

Justice Robin Phukan as permanent Judge of the Gauhati High Court

Shailesh Pramod Brahme

The Collegium noted that Shailesh Pramod Brahme is a competent lawyer with experience of about thirty years of practice in civil, criminal, constitutional and service law cases and that nothing adverse has been placed by the Department of Justice in the file.

Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla

The Collegium noted that as per Intelligence Bureau report Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla has a good personal and professional image and that nothing adverse has come to notice regarding his integrity and that he is not associated with any political party. The Intelligence Bureau however flagged that Pooniwalla had earlier worked under an advocate. It is reported that the said advocate has written an article in a publication in 2020 expressing concerns over the alleged lack of freedom of speech/expression in the country in the last 5-6 years.

The Collegium stated that the views expressed by a former senior of Pooniwalla have no bearing on his own competence, ability or credentials for appointment as a Judge of the Bombay High Court.

Jitendra Shantilal Jain

The Collegium noted that Jitendra Shantilal Jain has acquired considerable experience during his practice of 25 years with specialization in tax litigation. The Collegium further noted that enquiries have been made by a member of the Collegium conversant with the affairs of the High Court of Bombay on the issue which has been flagged by the Intelligence Bureau pertaining to his work in the chamber of a senior on the taxation side about 20 years ago.

“Enquiries have indicated that while it is correct that the candidate had ceased working in the chamber of that senior, he subsequently joined the chamber of a noted senior counsel at the Bar. The fact of the candidate having left the chamber of a senior earlier has no bearing on his ability, competence or integrity.”, the Collegium stated.

Justice Robin Phukan

The Collegium stated that with a view to assess the merit and suitability of Justice Robin Phukan, the Collegium scrutinized and evaluated the material placed on record including the observations made by the Department of Justice in the file as well as the report of the Judgment Evaluation Committee. Having considered these factors, the Collegium considered him suitable for appointment as a permanent judge.

Click here to read/download Collegium Resolutions