Recent comments by former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud have reignited discussions on India’s judicial appointment process. He emphasized the shared veto power between the judiciary and executive, highlighting tensions in the system. The Supreme Court collegium, responsible for judicial appointments, has faced criticism for opacity and delays, and the debate continues on how to balance judicial independence with accountability and transparency.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna, newly appointed as India’s 51st Chief Justice, has had a significant impact on the judiciary since joining the Supreme Court in 2019. His tenure is marked by key rulings on transparency, individual rights, and contentious issues like marital rape. Facing critical constitutional challenges, his leadership may shape Indian law and societal norms.
Former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud’s tenure is marked by a legacy of empathy, inclusivity, and a deeply humane approach to justice. Concerned about his legacy, he balanced his role with a profound sense of responsibility, emphasizing that the judiciary’s mission goes beyond legal interpretation to protect dignity and serve those most vulnerable. His leadership transformed the judiciary into not just an arbiter of law but a force for healing and equity, bridging the gap between justice and humanity. In his retirement, both the legal fraternity and the public reflect on a CJI who brought compassion to the bench, leaving the institution better than he found it.
On November 10, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud will retire, passing the role to Justice Sanjiv Khanna on November 11. Retired Supreme Court judges, including CJIs, are prohibited from practicing law to maintain judicial integrity and public trust, as outlined in Article 124(7). They may pursue roles in arbitration, commissions, academia, or public service, though some post-retirement appointments raise ethical concerns about impartiality.
Chief Justice of India Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud’s complex journey reflects a unique blend of Hindu right-wing ideology and liberal values. With a legacy shaped by his father, he influenced landmark cases on individual rights while facing criticism for perceived compromises on executive scrutiny. His tenure has sparked debate on judicial independence, leaving a significant, potentially lasting mark on Indian law and society.
The Bar Council of India is a legally mandated organisation formed under the Advocates Act, 1961. The act also mentions the powers and functions of the Bar Council of India. Its primary purpose is to oversee and regulate legal practice and education in India. In addition, it administers the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) annually, which serves as a selection process for individuals seeking to practice law in the country’s courts. The Bar Council also fulfils the role of regulatory authority by establishing guidelines for professional conduct and etiquette within the Indian legal community. Its main objective is safeguarding the rights, interests, and privileges of advocates throughout India. The Bar Council of India operates as a statutory and regulatory body established by the Advocates Act, 1961, with responsibilities encompassing the legal profession and education in the country. It also serves as the representative organisation for the legal community in India.
The Maternity Benefit Act of 1961 standardizes maternity leave and benefits for working women in India, offering up to 26 weeks of leave and addressing various aspects such as payment, job security, and childcare. Amendments have expanded protections, but a need for mental health considerations remains. Ongoing revisions are essential for progress.
Defamation in Indian law, defined under Section 499 of the IPC, involves harming an individual’s reputation through false statements. It includes criminal and civil aspects, with penalties for offenders. Recent judicial interpretations, including the controversial Subramanian Swamy case, highlight tensions between protecting reputation and maintaining free speech rights, necessitating careful legal consideration.
![[EXCLUSIVE] Landmark Judgements by CJI Chandrachud](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Supreme-Court-gets-5-new-judges-CJI-Chandrachud-administers-oath.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, the 50th Chief Justice of India (CJI) , was appointed by President Droupadi Murmu in November 2022, succeeding Uday Umesh Lalit. Son of former Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, he became a Supreme Court judge in May 2016. Prior to this, he served as Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court (2013–2016) and as a judge at the Bombay High Court (2000–2013).
Live streaming of court proceedings in India is seen as a “double-edged sword” because, while it promotes transparency, accountability, and public access to justice, it also poses challenges. On the positive side, live streaming allows citizens to witness the judicial process, enhancing trust and democratic engagement. However, it also raises concerns about privacy, the risk of sensationalism, and the potential for misuse of sensitive information. There is also fear that such visibility could influence the behavior of judges, lawyers, and witnesses, affecting the impartiality of court proceedings. Thus, while live streaming can enhance transparency, it must be balanced with safeguards to protect judicial integrity and privacy.