Subash Reddy

Subash Reddy

Sitting Judge of the Supreme Court of India

Assumed Office2nd Nov, 2018

Retired On4th Jan, 2022

Previously

Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court13th February 2016

Permanent Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High CourtJune 24th 2004

Additional Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High CourtDecember 2nd 2002 - June 23rd 2004

EnrolmentOctober 30th 1980

Age: 64

Tracked Cases: 3

Education

LawOsmania University College of Law , Hyderabad

GraduationAndhra Vidyalaya College

SchoolZilla Parishad High School, Sankarampet, Hyderabad

Profile

Justice Ramayyagari Subhash Reddy practiced for 22 years in the Tribunals, Civil Courts and High Court of Andhra Pradesh. He specialised in constitutional law and also practiced in the Supreme Court.

 

In December 2002, Reddy J was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. He became a Permanent Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in June 2004. He was sworn in as Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court in February, 2016.

 

Reddy J was elevated to the Supreme Court in November 2018

 

Notable Judgments

In Nand Kishore v State of Madhya Pradesh (2019) the Appellant, Nand Kishore, approached the Supreme Court to appeal death sentence awarded to him by the Trial Court, which was also confirmed by the High Court. The Appellant was awarded the death sentence for the rape and murder of a minor girl. Subash Reddy J authored the opinion of the three judge Bench which included Bobde and Rao JJ.

 

Reddy J noted how the conviction and sentencing of the Appellant was solely on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Also, there was no finding by the Trial Court or High Court stating the Appellant was beyond reformation. The Court also noted that the convict may not have been provided adequate legal assistance. The Bench reduced the death sentence to 25 years’ life imprisonment without any benefit of remission.

 

Reddy J also wrote a dissenting opinion in Ravi v State of Maharashtra (2019), in favour of commuting the death sentence of the appellant. He expressed the view that in a case of conviction based on circumstantial evidence, if no special reasons exist, the extreme punishment of death penalty should not be imposed. Reddy J also noted that the mitigating circumstances of the Appellant dominated the aggravating circumstances of the case and that there was no proof to show that reform or rehabilitation of the convict was not possible.

 

Justice Reddy also sat on the bench in Anuradha Bhasin v Union of India (2020) which dealt with the validity of the internet shut down and movement restrictions imposed upon the people in Jammu and Kashmir. The bench highlighted the need to strike a balance between liberty and security concerns so that the right to life is secured and enjoyed in the best possible manner. The Bench ruled that Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, imposing restrictions on citizens’ fundamental right to assemble peacefully, cannot be invoked as a tool to prevent the legitimate expression of opinion or grievance or exercise of any democratic rights.