Who is Justice M M Sundresh?

Justice M M Sundresh, stands as a paragon of judicial excellence, embodying the virtues that define a stalwart in the legal arena. He was born on 21^st July 1962 to Mr. V. K. Muthusamy, who was a Senior Advocate at the High Court of Judicature at Madras. He pursued his bachelor's in law degree from Madras Law College. He was nominated as Judge of the Supreme Court by former Chief Justice of India (CJI) N V Ramanna and appointed by former President of India, Ram Nath Kovind. He is famous as an environment-friendly judge.

Career

• Justice M M Sundresh enrolled as an Advocate in 1985 and served as a Government Advocate from 1991 to 1996.
• On 31st March 2009, he was appointed as an Additional Judge at the Madras High Court, later being confirmed as a Permanent Judge on 29^th March 2011.
  • Concurrently, he held the position of President at the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy.
• His elevation to the position of Judge in the SC took place on 31st August 2021.

What are Notable Cases of Justice M M Sundresh?

Madras High Court

• N. Selvathirumal v. Union of India (2016):
  • The Madras HC's Division Bench, led by Chief Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice M.M. Sundresh, instructed both CBSE-affiliated schools and private schools in Tamil Nadu to incorporate the singing of the National Anthem into their curriculum.
• Solaimalai v. Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corp. Ltd (2019):
  • The case is also known as elephant poaching case where a division bench of Madras HC gave order to probe elephant poaching in the state and appointed a committee of experts in dedicated to forest preservation make suggestions for preservation of indigenous species.

Supreme Court

• Union of India v. Rhea Chakraborty (2021):
  • A question upon financing illicit activity under Section 27A of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (NDPS) was decided by the Bombay HC as “providing money for a particular transaction or other transactions will not be financing of that activity”.
  • The bench consisting of justice M M Sundresh said that this decision of Bombay HC will not be treated as a precedent.
• Abu Salem Abdul Kayyum Ansari v. State of Maharashtra (2022):
  • The division bench consisting of Justice M M Sundresh held that on completion of 25 years of sentence of Abu Salem which started on 12th October 2005, the Central Government is bound to advice the President of India for exercise of the latter’s powers under Article 72 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and to release the appellant in terms of the national commitment as well as the principle based on comity of courts.
• Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022):
  • A division bench consisting of Justice M M Sundresh gave directions to the investigating agencies and also for the courts regarding the procedure for bail.
  • Also directed that Government of India may consider the introduction of a separate enactment in the nature of a Bail Act so as to streamline the grant of bails.
• M/S Shanti Fragrances v. Union of India (2022):
  • A 5-judge bench of SC consisting of Justice M M Sundresh held that “the numerical strength of the Judges taking a particular view is not relevant, but the Bench strength is determinative of the binding nature of the Judgment”.
  • By the aforementioned line, the SC meant that majority in a judgment will play no role, the decision of larger bench will prevail the decision of smaller bench.
• Jogi Ram v. Suresh Kumar (2022):
  • The division bench consisting of Justice M M Sundresh was considering Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
  • The court held that “If we were to hold so it would imply that if the wife is disinherited under the Will, it would be sustainable but if a limited estate is given it would mature into an absolute interest irrespective of the intent of the testator”.

What are Notable Quotes of Justice M M Sundresh?

• While discussing the importance of introduction of separate legislation for survellience, Justice M M Sundresh said that “There must be a codified law that empowers the agency to undertake acts of surveillance. Such a law must be subject to constitutional mandate. It will prevent arbitrary action preserving the privacy of individuals”.
• While discussing concerns upon online education Justice M M Sundresh said “Education is not mere imparting of knowledge, it is one's own growth of wisdom, compassion, character followed by conversion into action that would constitute education”.
• While discussing the importance of education of the coming generation, Justice M M Sundresh said “A man is both a creator and destroyer. Therefore, he is his own future. A better future can only be secured through the younger generation, existing and awaiting”.