Justice Madhav Jamdar
Published on: 07 Jul 2026, 5:34 am
Listen to this article
Spotlight is a series where we shine the, well, spotlight on members of the legal fraternity who made the news over the past week
Bombay High Court judge Justice Madhav Jamdar found himself under the spotlight this past week after his oral remarks during a politically charged hearing went viral online
The case dealt with an externment order (order banning/ expelling an individual from a locality/ district) passed by Mumbai Police against Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary, the Maharashtra State general secretary of the Socialist Democratic Party of India (SDPI)
Justice Jamdar sharply criticised the action of Mumbai police to extern Chaudhary, a former Lok Sabha candidate, from Mumbai and adjoining areas for a period of one year.
The judge asked why slogans like ‘BJP government murdabad’ and ‘Amit Shah murdabad’ attracted the measure of externment passed by a deputy commissioner of Mumbai police. He also referred to the recent protests happening across the country over examination paper leaks and said that “citizens were being made slaves of the Indian Government”
The judge orally remarked that police officers are authorities answerable to the public and not functionaries of the ministers
Justice Jamdar emphasised that citizens are entitled to protest and agitate against government decisions and the police could not pass externment orders to banish people from their own city merely for protesting or sloganeering.
In his judgment striking down the externment order, Justice Jamdar held that protesting against decisions of the government or raising slogans against it cannot constitute a valid ground for expulsion of a citizen from any area
“Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India inter alia contemplates that not only the citizens have the freedom of speech and expression, but they also have the right to live with dignity. The action taken by State of Maharashtra of externing Chaudhary, merely for opposing certain decisions of the Government of India, affects the Petitioner’s fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression and also right to live with dignity,” the judgment read
The judgment and more so, his oral remarks, quickly made the rounds on social media. Apart from netizens, political parties were also quick to comment on the judge’s remarks
In a post on X, Trinamool Congress national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee hailed Justice Jamdar for his courage to stand by constitutional freedoms and remind the country what judicial independence means
Even though the judgement is specific to the facts of Chaudhary’s case, the judge’s comments have been lauded as a reaffirmation of the constitutional right to protest at a moment when the use of externment, preventive detention and similar administrative powers against government critics has come under sustained public scrutiny
During the hearing, Justice Jamdar also remarked that on the same day a ten-year-old child had died in a road accident, the State Assembly was busy debating the election of its presiding officer. In a lighter vein, he even suggested that Chaudhary could consider switching sides, since “horse-trading” was under way across the State of Maharashtra and that doing so would put his pending FIRs through the ruling party’s proverbial “washing machine”
Who is Justice Madhav Jamdar?
Born on January 13, 1967, Justice Jamdar hails from Pune
His father, JD Jamdar was a judicial officer from 1960 and retired as a judge of the Bombay City Civil and Sessions Court in 1989. After his retirement, he served as member of the Mumbai Industrial Court till 1994
Justice Jamdar initially pursued a career in science after getting his B.Sc. from Kirti College of Arts, Science and Commerce and a Diploma in Industrial-Analytical Chemistry in 1988. He also worked in a pharmaceutical company until 1989
In 1991, he got his LL.B degree after studying at the New Law College in Mumbai’s Dadar
During his law studies, he interned with the late advocate MA Rane and joined his chambers after graduating
He practiced extensively on the appellate and original side in the Bombay High Court and appeared in civil, criminal and constitutional matters. Justice Jamdar appeared in several PILs and was also appointed by the High Court as amicus curiae in some cases dealing with the rise in offences relating to Women, Accidents in Railways, custodial deaths in Thane Central Prison, etc
As a lawyer, he represented, among others, the Maharashtra Medical Council, Serum Institute of India Limited, and Maharashtra State Textile Corporation. He was also a legal advisor to many tenants’ committees and societies regarding redevelopment projects in Mumbai
He also represented the Central government as Senior Counsel (Group-II) for a few years
He was elevated as an additional judge of the Bombay High Court on January 2, 2020. The appointment was made pursuant to a recommendation made by the Supreme Court Collegium in March 2019
Along with Jamdar, the Collegium had recommended four other advocates as High Court judges. While the other four names were approved by the Central Government in August the same year, Justice Madhav’s appointment was notified only in January 2020
He will have a tenure of nine years, ending on January 12, 2029
Important cases handled on Division Bench
Justices GS Patel and Madhav Jamdar
In January 2022, a Division Bench of Justice GS Patel (now retired) and Justice Jamdar rejected a petition to declare August 2 as a public holiday for celebrating the liberation/ independence of the Union Territory (UT) of Dadra & Nagar Haveli. The Bench held that there is no fundamental right to any public holidayand that it is a matter of government policy
The Bench also observed that there are too many public holidays in India, and an endeavour has to be made to reduce them instead of increasing their count
“There is no legally enforceable right that can be said to have been infringed. Nobody has a fundamental right to a public holiday..As it is, we have far too many public holidays in this country. Perhaps the time has come to reduce, not increase, the number of public holidays,” the order stated
The same Bench also passed an order paving the way for completing certain constructions projects in Dadar after the civic authorities passed an order restricting the construction of Ambedkar Smarak room and Buddha Vihar. The Bench observed that Ambedkar Smarak room and Buddha Viharare not just physical structures but have deep emotional and religious sentiments attached to it
In April 2024, the Bench passed a judgment holding that public sector banks do not have the power to issue Look Out Circulars (LOCs) against Indian citizens and foreigners under the office memoranda (OM) of the Central government. In light of this judgment, all LOCs issued at the request of public sector banks were quashed and set aside by the High Court
CJ Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar
In 2022, Justice Jamdar also spent some time on a Division Bench led by then Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta
One of the cases which came up before this Bench was a public interest litigation (PIL) raising concerns over the construction of a Hindu crematorium on the Erangal beach by fisherfolk. The Bench summoned the Mumbai Suburban District Collector for demolishing the crematorium without giving an opportunity of hearing to the members of the community
The Bench said that it suspected that there was something fishy with the PIL which alleged that the construction was illegal, theorising that a nearby hotel had put the petitioner up to filing the PIL. The Bench slammed authorities for being so swift in demolishing the crematorium in such a case
“We pass hundred orders to the State government to take action (against illegal structures) but no action is taken. We pass one order here, asking them to act in ‘accordance with law’ and the whole thing is swiftly demolished!” the Bench said
In another case, the same Bench took an unfavourable view of a PIL petition filed by Jain bodies seeking restrictions/ ban on the advertisements of meat and meat products in print and electronic media
The Bench said that such petitions were attempts to encroach on the rights of others
“What about violation of Article 19 of the Constitution? Why are you encroaching on others’ rights? There are two ways of looking at it. An ordinary man would say switch off the TV. But we would look at it from the point of law. What you are asking has to be provided by law, here there is no such law, which is why you are asking us to frame the law,” the Bench said
Important cases handled on Single Bench
In January 2024, Justice Jamdar criticised a sessions court for making unwarranted, stereotypical observations against transgender persons while rejecting a bail plea filed by a transwoman
The sessions court at Pandharpur had commented that it was “well known” that transgender persons “harass” people and that trans persons were getting “bolder, rowdier and nastier.” Such comments were made over the course of three paragraphs in the December 19 bail rejection order of the sessions court
Justice Jamdar condemned these comments, emphasising that transgender persons are citizens of this country who are entitled to the right to live with dignity
“Such stereotypical and generalising observations regarding the behaviour of the transgenders (sic) is uncalled for. Transgenders (sic) are citizens of this country. Article 21 of the Constitution of India protects the right to life and personal liberty of all citizens. The right to life includes right to live with dignity” the order stated
In April 2025 Justice Jamdar directed the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa to conduct an enquiry into the conduct of an advocate accused of attempting to delay the pronouncement of an order in a case that had already been fully argued and was listed solely for delivering a verdict
The lawyer, advocatte Vijay Kurle, allegedly appeared in court on the day scheduled for order pronouncement and requested an adjournment on the ground that he intended to file his appearance and argue the matter further
While ordering the investigation, Justice Jamdar observed that such conduct undermines the duties of an advocate to the court
The issue took a turn when the judge ordered a police enquiry into an “attempt to frame” him after another lawyer, advocate Partho Sarkar, who is a close associate of Kurle, allegedly made repeated calls to his wife offering to urgently buy their Mumbai flat
Justice Jamdar said that Sarkar contacted his wife several times about purchasing a jointly owned flat that had been listed on an online portal
The next day, Justice Jamdar spoke to Sarkar himself and informed him that he was a sitting judge of the Bombay High Court
After that conversation, Justice Jamdar had checked his wife’s phone and discovered that it was Sarkar’s WhatsApp profile and identified him as an advocate. Despite being told that he was speaking to a High Court judge, Sarkar had failed to disclose that he was a lawyer
The judge said that this interaction coupled with a missed call from Sarkar the following day, raised serious red flags
The Court also took note of the conduct of advocate Mathews Nedumpara, another close associate of Kurle
Nedumpara on April 17 had accused Justice Jamdar of insulting him by asking him to take the seat. He is also stated to have said that he was not the slave of the Court, before leaving the courtroom without permission
Justice Jamdar said these comments came immediately after the April 9 order against Kurle and also took note of Nedumpara’s past conduct
“After this Court passed the order dated 9th April 2025 in Civil Revision Application No.189 of 2025 recording unprofessional conduct of Mr. Vijay Kurle and directing that Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa should conduct appropriate enquiry in his conduct, when this matter was listed before this Court on 17th April 2025, Mr. Nedumpara made certain statements prima facie with an intention to humiliate and browbeat this Court and tarnish image of this Court, which amounts to contempt of the Court,” the Court said.
Justice Jamdar said Sarkar had made the calls to frame him after orders were passed with respect to the conduct of Kurle and Nedumpara
Justice Jamdar then ordered that the case be placed before the Chief Justice so that it can be assigned to a different bench
On May 30, 2025, Justice Jamdar made a candid confession regarding the conditions under which judges work. While the judgment was pronounced in open court in December 2024, it was uploaded over five months later
Justice Jamdar explained that the sheer volume of work before judges, prolonged court hours, late-night order writing and weekend sittings were reasons that contributed to the delay
He noted that he was routinely hearing matters for over two hours after court hours, finalising orders until late night and continuing to work on weekends and holidays to complete backlog
“As I am conducting the Court at least for 2 – 2 & ½ hours almost every day after regular Court hours, leaving the Chamber after correcting/signing daily orders after 10:30 pm–11:30 pm on almost all the court working days and reading the case papers at my residence up to 02:00 am, reading the case papers in the morning at least for one hour and also attending the Chamber on almost all Saturdays/Sundays/Holidays for completing pending work, uploading of this order is delayed,” the judgment said.
In January this year, a politically charged matter came up before the judge following clashes on December 2, 2025, polling day for the Mahad Municipal Council in Raigad district. Rival groups of the Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde faction) and the NCP (Ajit Pawar faction) had come to blows despite prohibitory orders being in force
Justice Jamdar came down heavily on the Maharashtra government for its failure to arrest Vikas Gogawale, son of State cabinet minister and Shiv Sena MLA Bharat Gogawale, in connection with cross-FIRs arising from the clash
The judge repeatedly questioned why the police had not arrested Vikas despite non-bailable warrants, proclamations by magistrate and claims of intensive efforts to trace him.
He also raised concerns about how the minister continued to serve in the cabinet even as his son remains absconding and beyond the reach of the police
“All are citizens. There are no special citizens,” the judge added
Justice Jamdar also remarked that such police inaction was adversely affecting the rule of law in the State
A domestic violence and dowry harassment case involving politically connected sugar baron Anil Kisan Lokhande was also handled by Justice Jamdar in January this year. Lokhande belonged to Eknath Shinde Shiv Sena faction and was poised to contest from the NCP faction that was led by late Ajit Pawar
Justice Jamdar refused to grant anticipatory bail to Lokhande and his wife who were accused of inflicting severe cruelty on their daughter-in-law
Justice Jamdar noted that it was a sad reality of Indian society that women facing grave domestic violence often strive to remain in their marriages, even at great personal risk. He obserbed that the daughter-in-law’s decision to continue in the marriage despite brutal treatment from her marital family could not be used to brand the criminal case as false or exaggerated
“The same is a sad reality of Indian society, where many victims of domestic violence in spite of facing grave threat to their life continue the matrimonial relationship as due to the orthodox atmosphere, they face social stigma if they separate from husband’s family or take divorce,” he said
Upcoming cases
Justice Madhav J Jamdar and Justice Pravin S Patil
Just before the Bombay High Court closed its doors for its summer vacation, Justice Jamdar, who is now heading a Division Bench, tightened its focus on advocates’ safety, turning squarely to systemic measures for protecting lawyers from violence and harassment in Maharashtra
A PIL petition came up before the Bench which was triggered by a March 7 incident where a lawyer, advocate Kajal Shelake, was assaulted by a litigant on the premises of the Kolhapur district court complex
The matter is now under the active consideration of the Bench
Bombay High Court
Right to protest
Justice Madhav Jamdar
Spotlight
