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).
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!![[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=820%2C461&ssl=1)
INDIA: Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud is a prominent Indian jurist and currently serves as the 50th Chief Justice of India. He is the son of Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud, who holds the record as the longest-serving Chief Justice of India. D.Y. Chandrachud was appointed by President Droupadi Murmu in November 2022, succeeding Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit.
Known for his progressive judgments and unwavering commitment to upholding the Constitution of India, Justice Chandrachud has gained widespread recognition as one of the most influential and respected justices in the Supreme Court.
His tenure has been marked by several landmark rulings that have shaped Indian jurisprudence.
In May 2016, Justice Chandrachud was elevated to the Supreme Court of India. Prior to this, he served as the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court from 2013 to 2016 and was a judge of the Bombay High Court from 2000 to 2013.
Over the years, he has contributed to more than 220 judgments, cementing his role as one of the most prolific judges in the history of the Supreme Court.
Some Of His Most Notable Rulings
Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right (K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017)
The case originated when retired Justice K.S. Puttaswamy challenged the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar scheme, claiming it infringed upon personal privacy and autonomy. The government argued that Aadhaar was essential for delivering welfare benefits.
A nine-judge bench was convened to decide whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. Justice Chandrachud, writing the lead judgment, stressed the importance of privacy in a democratic society.
On August 24, 2017, the Court unanimously ruled that-
“the right to privacy is indeed a fundamental right integral to the dignity and autonomy of individuals.”
This ruling laid the foundation for future challenges to the Aadhaar scheme and emphasized that personal data must be protected from arbitrary state interference.
Decriminalization of Section 377 (Navtej Johar v. Union of India, 2018)
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code criminalized consensual same-sex relations, leading to widespread discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community. Activists argued that this colonial-era law violated fundamental rights.
A five-judge constitution bench heard the petitions challenging Section 377. Justice Chandrachud provided a concurring opinion against the criminalization of consensual same-sex relationships.
On September 6, 2018, the Supreme Court decriminalized Section 377, declaring that-
“sexual orientation is an intrinsic part of human dignity.”
This ruling marked a historic victory for LGBTQ+ rights in India and reaffirmed that all individuals deserve equal rights regardless of their sexual orientation.
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, which her father contested, claiming it was a forced marriage. He sought its annulment.
The Supreme Court had to balance individual autonomy with societal and familial pressures. Justice Chandrachud highlighted the importance of personal liberty and the right to choose one’s partner.
On March 8, 2018, the Court ruled in favor of Hadiya, asserting that-
“an adult has the right to make decisions regarding marriage and religion without external interference.”
This judgment reinforced individual freedoms, especially in matters of personal choice in love and faith.
![[EXCLUSIVE] Landmark Judgements by CJI Chandrachud](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/image-4-8.png?resize=820%2C615&ssl=1)
Abortion Rights for Unmarried Women (2021)
The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act largely limited abortion access to married women or specific conditions for unmarried women, reflecting patriarchal norms.
A petition was filed challenging these discriminatory provisions. Justice Chandrachud, heading the bench, examined whether such restrictions were unjust towards unmarried women.
On September 29, 2021, in a landmark ruling on International Safe Abortion Day, the Supreme Court extended abortion rights under the MTP Act to unmarried women.
Justice Chandrachud emphasized that-
“laws should not discriminate based on marital status and must reflect contemporary societal values regarding women’s autonomy.”
Sabarimala Case (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018)
The Sabarimala temple had long barred women of menstruating age from entering, citing religious customs. This practice was challenged as discriminatory against women’s rights.
A five-judge bench deliberated on whether these restrictions violated constitutional rights to equality and religious freedom.
On September 28, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that barring women from entering Sabarimala was unconstitutional.
Justice Chandrachud observed-
“Such practices were discriminatory and comparable to untouchability, which violated fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.”
Decriminalization of Adultery (Joseph Shine v. Union of India, 2018)
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code criminalized adultery, penalizing only men while treating women as passive victims, thus reinforcing gender inequality.
The Supreme Court reviewed whether this law violated gender equality and personal liberty under the Constitution.
On September 27, 2018, Justice Chandrachud declared Section 497 unconstitutional, stating-
“Laws must reflect modern values regarding relationships and personal autonomy.”
This ruling reinforced gender equality in matters of love and personal relationships.
![[EXCLUSIVE] Landmark Judgements by CJI Chandrachud](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Media.jpeg?resize=820%2C461&ssl=1)
Recognition of Living Will for Passive Euthanasia (Common Cause v. Union of India, 2018)
In India, the absence of legal recognition for living wills left terminally ill patients without options for passive euthanasia, forcing them into prolonged suffering.
A petition sought legal clarity on whether individuals could dictate their end-of-life care through living wills.
On March 9, 2018, the Supreme Court recognized living wills as valid under specific conditions. Justice Chandrachud remarked that-
“Individuals have the right to die with dignity and make decisions about their medical treatment when facing terminal illness.”
Demolition of Supertech’s Twin Towers (2021)
Supertech’s twin towers in Noida were constructed in violation of building norms, raising serious concerns about public safety and governance.
A petition was filed to challenge these illegal constructions due to potential risks to surrounding residents.
On August 31, 2021, Justice Chandrachud ordered the demolition of Supertech’s twin towers, stressing that-
“Adherence to building regulations is essential for urban safety and governance integrity.”
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2023)
The case involved a power tussle between the Delhi government and the Lieutenant Governor over control of administrative services in the capital.
The Supreme Court was called upon to clarify the distribution of powers between the two 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,”
-reinforcing democratic governance and the authority of elected representatives over administrative functions.
Conclusion
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s landmark judgments have set a high standard for progressive jurisprudence in India. From upholding individual privacy to championing gender equality and personal freedoms, his rulings continue to shape the nation’s legal landscape.
Among other important decisions, Chief Justice Chandrachud’s interpretation of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act of 1955 has had significant ramifications for citizenship rights in India.
Another notable judgment is the case of M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, which outlines crucial steps for protecting the endangered Great Indian Bustard from extinction.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI Chandrachud
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
