Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud is an Indian jurist who is the 50th Chief Justice of India. He is the son of the longest-serving CJI, Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud. President Droupadi Murmu appointed D.Y. Chandrachud, who succeeded Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit in November 2022.
Chandrachud has been known for his progressive judgements and commitment to upholding the Constitution of India. He is widely regarded as one of the most influential and respected justices in the Supreme Court.
In May 2016, he was appointed as a Supreme Court judge of India. He was also the chief justice of the Allahabad High Court from 2013 to 2016 and a Bombay High Court judge from 2000 to 2013.
Justice Chandrachud has been one of the Supreme Court's most prolific judges, contributing to over 220 decisions during his tenure. Here are some of his notable judgements.
1. Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right (K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017)
The case arose when retired Justice K.S. Puttaswamy challenged the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar scheme, arguing that it infringed upon individual privacy and autonomy. The government contended that the scheme was essential for delivering welfare benefits.
Therefore, the Supreme Court convened a nine-judge bench to deliberate on whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, writing the lead judgement, emphasised the importance of privacy in a democratic society.
On August 24, 2017, the Court unanimously declared that the right to privacy is indeed a fundamental right integral to the dignity and autonomy of individuals.
This landmark ruling laid the groundwork for subsequent challenges against the Aadhaar scheme and reinforced the notion that personal data must be protected from arbitrary state interference.
2. Decriminalisation of Section 377 (Navtej Johar v. Union of India, 2018)
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code criminalised consensual same-sex relations, leading to discrimination and persecution of LGBTQ+ individuals. Activists argued that this Colonial-era law violated fundamental rights.
A five-judge constitution bench was formed to hear petitions challenging Section 377. Justice Chandrachud provided a concurring opinion arguing against the criminalisation of consensual acts between adults.
On September 6, 2018, the Supreme Court decriminalised Section 377, stating that sexual orientation is an intrinsic part of human dignity.
The judgement emphasised that every individual deserves equal rights regardless of their sexual orientation, marking a significant victory for LGBTQ+ rights in India.
3. Hadiya Marriage Case (Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan K.M., 2018)
The case involved Hadiya, a woman who converted to Islam and married a Muslim man. Her father challenged the marriage, claiming it was a case of force, and sought annulment.
The Supreme Court had to balance individual autonomy against familial and societal pressures. Justice Chandrachud emphasised personal liberty and the right to choose one's partner.
On March 8, 2018, the Court upheld Hadiya's marriage, stating that an adult has the right to make decisions regarding marriage and religion without external interference.
This judgement reinforced individual freedoms and personal choice in matters of love and faith.
4. Abortion Rights for Unmarried Women (2021)
The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act limited abortion access primarily to married women or specific circumstances for unmarried women, reflecting outdated patriarchal norms.
A petition was filed challenging these restrictions. Justice Chandrachud led a bench that examined whether such limitations were discriminatory against unmarried women.
On September 29, 2021, in a progressive ruling on International Safe Abortion Day, the Supreme Court extended abortion rights under the MTP Act to unmarried women as well.
Justice Chandrachud asserted that laws should not discriminate based on marital status and must reflect contemporary societal values regarding women's autonomy.
5. Sabarimala Case (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018)
The Sabarimala temple barred women of menstruating age from entering, citing religious customs. This practice was challenged as discriminatory against women’s rights.
A five-judge bench was tasked with evaluating whether such restrictions violated constitutional rights to equality and freedom of religion.
On September 28, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that prohibiting women from entering Sabarimala was unconstitutional.
Justice Chandrachud highlighted that such practices were discriminatory and comparable to untouchability, thus violating fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
6. Decriminalisation of Adultery (Joseph Shine v. Union of India, 2018)
Section 497 of the IPC criminalised adultery but only penalised men for engaging in extramarital affairs while treating women as property rather than individuals with agency.
The Supreme Court examined whether this law violated constitutional rights related to gender equality and personal liberty.
On September 27, 2018, Justice Chandrachud declared Section 497 unconstitutional.
He emphasised that laws must reflect modern values regarding relationships and personal autonomy, thereby reinforcing gender equality in matters of love and fidelity.
7. Recognition of Living Will for Passive Euthanasia (Common Cause v. Union of India, 2018)
The absence of legal recognition for living wills left terminally ill patients without options for passive euthanasia, leading to prolonged suffering against their wishes.
A petition sought clarity on whether individuals could dictate their end-of-life care through living wills.
On March 9, 2018, the Supreme Court recognised living wills as valid documents for passive euthanasia under certain conditions.
Justice Chandrachud stated that individuals have the right to die with dignity and make choices about their medical treatment when facing terminal illness.
8. Demolition of Supertech’s Twin Towers (2021)
Supertech's twin towers in Noida were built in violation of building norms and safety regulations, raising concerns about public safety.
A petition was filed seeking action against these illegal constructions due to their potential risks to residents and neighbouring buildings.
On August 31, 2021, Justice Chandrachud ordered the demolition of Supertech’s twin towers within three months due to their illegal status.
He underscored adherence to building regulations as essential for urban safety and governance integrity.
9. Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2023)
A power struggle between the Delhi government and the Lieutenant Governor over control of administrative services raised questions about governance in Delhi.
The Supreme Court needed to clarify the extent of powers held by both entities under constitutional provisions.
On May 11, 2023, Justice Chandrachud ruled that the Delhi government had control over all services except those related to land and law enforcement.
This judgement reinforced democratic governance by affirming elected representatives' authority over administrative functions in Delhi.
Conclusion
These landmark verdicts by CJI Chandrachud have set a precedent for future cases and have been widely praised for their progressive approach to justice.
One such subject is Section 6A of the Citizenship Act of 1955, which was read in a new manner by CJI Chandrachud, with important ramifications for citizenship rights in India.
Another significant judgement that garnered attention was M.K. Ranjitsinh vs. Union of India, which delves into the steps needed to protect the Great Indian Bustard from potential extinction.
Source: Supreme Court
The information on these decisions was gathered primarily from the Supreme Court's official website, which contains several landmark decisions.
These judgements highlight the crucial role of the judiciary in shaping and interpreting laws that have far-reaching consequences for society.
Also Read| List of Chief Justices of India
-1754117211386.jpg)
Comments
All Comments (0)
Join the conversation