The Judge Who Always Tilted: Why B Sudershan Reddy's Record Haunts His Vice-Presidential Candidature

The Vice President’s office is not merely ceremonial. It is an institution that represents balance, dignity, and an ability to rise above the fray of partisan politics. Which is why the INDI Alliance’s nomination of Balkrishna Sudershan Reddy has drawn such attention.

On paper, his journey from a farmer’s son in Ranga Reddy district to a seat on the Supreme Court is remarkable. But the deeper story lies in his choices on the bench and beyond, choices that often seemed to lean in one particular direction.

Born in 1946, Reddy studied at Osmania University and enrolled as an advocate in 1971. He climbed steadily through the judicial ladder, first as a judge at the Andhra Pradesh High Court, then as Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court, and eventually as a Supreme Court judge in 2007.

His rise was steady, but his record reveals more than legal milestones. It reveals a pattern of sympathies and interventions that speak louder than his résumé.

When Judgements Tilted One Way

Perhaps the most striking example was the 2011 ruling on Salwa Judum. At a time when Maoist insurgency was at its peak, tribals in Chhattisgarh had taken up arms to defend their villages. Supported by the state, they formed the Salwa Judum movement. The initiative was far from perfect, but for many tribals it meant survival.

A bench led by Reddy struck it down, calling it unconstitutional and even describing the effort as “the horror, the horror.” The phrase was lifted directly from the vocabulary used by Maoists themselves. For the state, the judgment meant dismantling a crucial tool in the fight against extremism. For the insurgents, it was legal vindication.

Then came the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case. In 2012, thousands of survivors still hoped for a reopening of the matter to secure harsher punishment for the guilty. The Supreme Court bench that Reddy sat on refused. It was a decision that left victims with nowhere to turn. For those who had long accused Rajiv Gandhi of facilitating Warren Anderson’s escape, the verdict felt less like closure and more like convenient silence.

A Pattern That Continues Beyond the Courtroom

Retirement did not end Reddy’s influence. If anything, it made his leanings clearer. In 2024, he joined a group of retired judges and activists calling for a halt to India’s defence exports to Israel. At a time when New Delhi was building strong defence partnerships and fighting global Islamist terror, such a stance was more than symbolic. It played directly into the hands of lobbies hostile to India’s interests.

Two years earlier, in 2022, Reddy dismissed the widespread grief over actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s death as little more than a media distraction. Millions of Indians, who saw the case as a demand for accountability and justice, felt belittled. Reddy instead used the moment to lecture about rural neglect, a point that might have been valid elsewhere but came across as tone-deaf to genuine public sentiment.

That same year, he co-signed a letter criticising the Uttar Pradesh government’s bulldozer action against rioters and mafia. While ordinary citizens welcomed a firm hand against lawbreakers, Reddy called it a “mockery of the Constitution.”

What the letter overlooked was the context: the violence had erupted after the Nupur Sharma episode, when her statements were met not with debate but with mobs pelting stones and burning property. Instead of standing with law and order, the letter painted these violent outbursts as justifiable anger. Once again, Reddy’s sympathies appeared directed away from the state and towards those challenging it.

In 2020, when Prashant Bhushan was convicted of contempt of court for his repeated attacks on the judiciary, Reddy’s instinct was to defend him. This fitted the pattern of siding with activists who undermined institutions rather than those seeking to preserve them.

In 2013, Reddy was given a chance to prove himself in a role that demanded accountability and persistence, as Goa’s first Lokayukta. Appointed by Manohar Parrikar, the post was meant to serve as a bulwark against corruption.

But within months, he resigned, citing personal reasons. A resignation letter replaced what could have been a landmark tenure. To many, it appeared that he preferred activism and statements to the hard work of institution-building.

The Telangana Caste Census Episode

His most recent role as head of Telangana’s expert group on the caste census revealed yet again the circle in which he operates. Alongside him sat Kancha Ilaiah Shepherd, known for provocative and often anti-Hindu commentary; Praveen Chakravarty, a Congress strategist close to Rahul Gandhi; and Sukhadeo Thorat, a long-time proponent of divisive identity-based politics.

The report they produced unsurprisingly called the exercise “scientific” and “a model for the nation.” Neutral analysis it was not. For many, it looked more like a Congress project dressed up in academic garb, with Reddy presiding over it.

Independence, or Its Appearance?

To the casual observer, Reddy appears to be the very picture of an erudite jurist, soft-spoken, scholarly, and independent-minded. Yet, when one looks at the pattern of his judgments, his public interventions, and the company he keeps, the independence begins to look less like reality and more like careful packaging.

He weakened the state’s fight against Maoists. He struck down measures meant for soldiers’ families. He was part of a bench that refused justice in Bhopal. He repeatedly sided with activist lawyers and lobbies hostile to India’s interests. And in Telangana, he worked hand in hand with the Congress’s intellectual ecosystem.

The Larger Question

The Vice President is not merely a tie-breaker in the Rajya Sabha. The office represents the dignity of the Republic. It requires a figure who can rise above narrow sympathies and stand as a neutral guardian of the Constitution.

Balkrishna Sudershan Reddy’s record raises a serious question: Does he embody that neutrality, or does he reflect a long-standing ideological alignment presented as independence?

His nomination by the INDI Alliance forces the country to reflect on what kind of figure should occupy the second-highest constitutional post.

The answer is for the people, and for history, to judge.