New Delhi, Apr 11: Calling for an overhaul of legal architecture to meet the demands of an evolving economy, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday said that the country’s transformation into a USD 10 trillion economy cannot be achieved through capital or policy alone and that the quality of the legal system would be a crucial factor.
The CJI underscored the need for predictability, specialisation, and a culture of good faith in commercial law to help the country achieve this goal, as it will require capital that involves commitments that unfold over time and for which investor confidence is a must.
He asserted that mechanisms like mediation would do more for India’s economic competitiveness than many reforms that attract greater attention. The CJI also stressed on the use of technology and adapting legal education to respond to the needs of the changing economy.
Speaking at the ‘Rule of Law Convention 2026’ on the theme ‘Legal Reform Roadmap to a USD 10 Trillion Bharat’, organised by the Bar Association of India, the CJI said the topic was not merely an aspiration for the country but a serious consideration and dealt with not a “marginal” query but one of the most important questions.
“I am confident that we will surely rise to the occasion. A USD 10 trillion mark will not be built by capital or policy alone. It will be built in no small part by the quality of the legal system that upholds the rule of law and the promises on which all of that depends.
“Our country never lacked the legal talent to build that system. And what this convention affirms is that it does not lack the will as well,” said CJI Surya Kant.
He said the generation that shapes India’s commercial jurisprudence for a USD10 trillion economy will be remembered the same way as the generation that shaped its constitutional jurisprudence.
He said that to reach the mark, the country needed to attract capital of a very different kind.
“This is capital that is patient, long-term and dependent on institutional reliability; whether it is a pension fund investment in infrastructure, a technology company transferring proprietary know-how, or a global manufacturer establishing an integrated supply chain, these are not short-term bets, they are commitments that unfold over time,” the CJI said.
He said that investors, before committing, needed to know whether the legal system governing that investment would remain honest, consistent and predictable over the years of their commitment.
“At its core, the question is one of trust; It is not merely about enforcement at the stage of breach of a contract, but about the continued integrity of obligations for performance. Such confidence among the investors enables commerce and commercial relationships to create the value they are intended to generate,” the CJI said.
Underlining the changing nature of commercial disputes over the last two decades, he said, from being relatively straightforward, centred on non-payments, breach of supply agreements and clear questions of liability, they have now emerged from relationships of far greater complexity and duration.
“And the reason for this shift is not merely procedural. It is fundamentally economic in origin. As commerce grows in scale and ambition, it moves away from isolated transactions toward continuing relationships,” the CJI said.
He said that the present commercial laws had served the country reasonably well, but the legitimacy of law was in its ability to remain responsive to the society it served.
“There is no need to discard the existing one. It is to enable the existing framework to grow so that it protects not just the moment of agreement, but the full life of the relationship. Our courts have already paved the way in their approach to public contracts and legitimate expectations.”
“They have demonstrated that the law can look beyond breach and remedy and ask what fairness demands across the life of a relationship. That instinct is already present in our public law. It is now time to carry it into the commercial spheres as well,” CJI Surya Kant said.
Regarding the question of a legal ecosystem that helped to create the kind of investor confidence in sync with long-horizon commerce, he said there were three imperatives: predictability, where similar situations, despite changes in governments or events, were governed with similar principles and the development of an ethos of dispute prevention through fostering a culture of good faith in contract performance.
“Mechanisms like mediation can deliver on their full promise if we foster this culture (of dispute prevention) and guard it jealously. So litigation becomes the last resort rather than the first response. That shift alone would do more for India’s economic competitiveness than many reforms that attract greater attention,” the CJI said.
The third imperative, according to CJI Surya Kant, was specialisation.
“The nature of commercial disputes today has outgrown the scope of the generalist framework within which much of our legal training has been traditionally oriented. Disputes involving infrastructure, finance or digital systems increasingly demand sector-specific expertise; the profession must invest in that depth and legal education must respond accordingly and produce graduates suitable to the economy they are going to serve.”
“In fact, there is a lot of requirement for our judges also to require a periodic orientation. And for that, I will sincerely make some efforts where some domain experts can have an informal interaction with judges to understand the different nuances of the economic system, so that they have a fair idea beyond the law books,” the CJI said.
He also highlighted the importance of treating technology as part of the legal system.
“I believe technology must be treated as part of the legal systems, as part of its core infrastructure, not as an optional upgrade. Digital case management, AI-assisted research tools and electronic postings directly affect the speed, accessibility and cost of justice,” the CJI said, adding,
“But of course, human judgment must remain at its core. The objective is to remove every avoidable obstacle between a legitimate claim and its fair resolution.”
CJI Surya Kant also emphasised the role of the bar in realising the goal, saying the commercial jurisprudence, over the years, had seen a sustained engagement between the bar and the bench and its next phase would require the same quality of effort, collaboration and commitment between both sides.
“It depends equally on whether the bar chooses to see itself as a worthy stakeholder in India’s economic future, or a mere service provider.
“That shift cannot be mandated by legislation or a court order. It must come as a matter of professional commitment,” he said, adding that the generation that shapes India’s commercial jurisprudence for the economic goal will be remembered the same way as the generation that shaped its constitutional jurisprudence.
