Justice Bela M Trivedi’s retirement from the Supreme Court took an unexpected turn, sparking controversy within the legal community. In a break from tradition, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) chose not to organise a farewell function in her honour—a decision that drew sharp criticism from Chief Justice of India BR Gavai. Presiding over the ceremonial bench on her final day, CJI Gavai did not hide his disappointment, publicly calling out the SCBA’s move.
“The stand taken by the Association, I must deprecate openly as I believe in being plain and straight. On such occasions, such a stand ought not to have been taken by the Association,” he said.
Senior Advocate and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President, Kapil Sibal, spoke with heartfelt admiration for Justice Trivedi.
“This court is a constellation of stars, and you are one of them,” Sibal said. “Just think about it, you are the 11th woman judge in this court. In the 75 years of this country, one lady judge was appointed every seven odd years. That itself is a great milestone.”
Sibal also recalled a courtroom exchange that left a lasting impression on him. In a case involving an individual charged under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), he had sought the person’s transfer from Karnataka to Kerala. Justice Trivedi, however, denied the plea.
Who is Justice Bela M Trivedi
Justice Bela M. Trivedi, born on June 10, 1960, in Patan, North Gujarat, made history as the eleventh woman judge to be elevated to the Supreme Court of India in its 75-year existence. She demitted office in May 2025 after serving three-and-a-half years on the apex court bench.
Her judicial journey began in July 1995 when she was appointed as a judge of the City Civil and Sessions Court in Ahmedabad. She went on to hold key positions such as Registrar (Vigilance) in the Gujarat High Court and Law Secretary in the Government of Gujarat. Her elevation to the Gujarat High Court came on February 17, 2011, following which she served on the Rajasthan High Court from June 2011 until her return to Gujarat in February 2016.
Justice Trivedi was elevated to the Supreme Court on August 31, 2021, as part of a historic batch of nine new judges, which included three women. Her tenure on the top court was marked by participation in several landmark constitutional rulings.
In November 2022, she was part of a five-judge Constitution Bench that upheld, by a 3:2 majority, the 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) introduced in 2019—excluding the SC/ST/OBC categories.
In another significant case, she served on a seven-judge Constitution Bench which, in August 2024, ruled 6:1 that states could make sub-classifications within Scheduled Castes to ensure benefits for the most backward among them. Justice Trivedi dissented with a detailed 85-page judgment, holding that only Parliament has the authority to alter the SC list, and states cannot make such classifications.
Her farewell was marked with a ceremonial sitting led by Chief Justice B. R. Gavai, continuing the Supreme Court tradition of honoring outgoing judges. Justice Trivedi’s career remains a testament to her deep commitment to the law, constitutional principles, and public service.
Justice Trivedi’s important judgments as Supreme Court judge
Upholding Constitutional validity of EWS reservation
In a significant verdict, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, in a 3:2 majority, upheld the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019. This amendment provides a 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in educational institutions and government jobs, marking a pivotal moment in India’s affirmative action framework.
Reversing the ‘skin to skin’ judgment
The Supreme Court overruled a controversial Bombay High Court decision which had interpreted the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to require ‘skin-to-skin’ contact for an act to qualify as sexual assault. Justice Bela M. Trivedi, writing for the bench, observed that such a narrow reading of Section 7 of the Act was illogical and undermined the very purpose of POCSO, which is aimed at protecting children from sexual abuse in all its forms.
Marking appearances of lawyers
In a ruling concerning legal representation, the Court emphasized that only those advocates who are specifically authorised and instructed to argue a case on a given day should be marked as appearing. This judgment, also authored by Justice Trivedi, came in response to a case where a litigant denied having engaged any lawyers for filing a special leave petition (SLP). Noting the seriousness of the allegation, the Court ordered a CBI investigation into the alleged misrepresentation.