13th Aug 2014 - 8th Nov 2022
Born on November 9, 1957 and enrolled as an Advocate in June, 1983, Justice Lalit practised in the High Court of Bombay till December, 1985. Shifted his practice to Delhi in January, 1986 and between 1986 to 1992, he worked with former Attorney General for India, Soli Sorabjee.
He was designated as Senior Advocate by the Supreme Court in April, 2004. And has appeared as Amicus Curiae in many matters. He was appointed as Special Public Prosecutor for CBI to conduct trial in all 2G matters under the orders of the Supreme Court. He was Amit Shah’s lawyer in the fake encounter cases of Sohrabuddin Sheikh and Tulsiram Prajapati in which Shah was accused of murder and conspiracy.An August 2014 Press Trust of India news report stated that Lalit had a high reputation for his preparation, patience, and “sober demeanor” while arguing his cases.
Justice Lalit was a Member of Supreme Court of India Legal Services Committee for two terms. And was subsequently appointed Judge of the Supreme Court of India on August 13, 2014.
Justice Lalit was one of the judges on multi-faith bench that heard the controversial Triple Talaq case in 2017 that struck down the practice of validity of Triple Talaq (Talaq-e-Biddat) and asked the Central government to bring legislation in six months to govern marriage and divorce in the Muslim community. The court said till the government formulates a law regarding triple talaq, there would be an injunction on husbands pronouncing triple talaq on their wives.
He was on the Bench with Justice AK Goel where it was directed that in order that contained detailed guidelines to curb instances of ‘misuse’ of Section 498A IPC.
Settling a contentious issue, a two Judge Bench of Supreme Court comprising Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit held that the 6 months waiting period prescribed under Section 13B(2) of Hindu Marriage Act for divorce by mutual consent is not mandatory, and can be waived under certain circumstances.
Highlighting the importance of having men and women with leadership qualities among the subordinate judiciary, which has over two crore pending cases, the Supreme Court said subordinate judiciary “cannot rest in a state of helplessness” as litigants wait in snaking, ever-longer queues for their turn. A Bench of Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit, in their 22-page judgment, said there was no room for non-performers among the subordinate judiciary. As ‘public interest is above individual interest’, the Bench fixed a time-bound hearing and disposing of criminal cases, especially those involving bail; and constant monitoring by the High Court over the functioning of subordinate Courts.