Key rulings that the 50th CJI, Justice DY Chandrachud, was part of

He can also be credited for the work done by the Supreme Court’s e-committee on the e-courts programme under his chairmanship. Chandrachud, being the chairman of the e-committee, also oversaw the top court’s move to a virtual hearing system during the pandemic.

Having served as a judge of the Supreme Court since 2016, Justice Chandrachud has formed part of benches that delivered many crucial judgments.

Right from stressing the importance of dissent as the security valve of a democracy to overturning his father Justice YV Chandrachud’s judgment (relating to fundamental rights in the infamous ADM Jabalpur case), Justice DY Chandrachud’s judgments and opinions have often paved the way for many reforms and have also received appreciation for being progressive in their interpretation of the law.

Incidentally, YV Chandrachud was also a CJI, making this the first time a father and son have held the position.

Also Read | Justice Chandrachud to take oath as CJI today: What era of judiciary will 'open-minded' chief bring?

Moneycontrol takes a look at some of the key rulings that Justice DY Chandrachud was part of as a Supreme Court judge.

Right to privacy as a fundamental right

While writing the judgment for the conditional bench that upheld right to privacy as a fundamental right, Justice DY Chandrachud overruled the habeas corpus case of the Emergency era which had held that fundamental rights can be suspended at a time when emergency is proclaimed. The overruled judgement was passed by a bench that included Justice YV Chandrachud.

Aadhaar

In challenge to the validity of the Aadhaar scheme, Chandrachud Jr was the sole dissenter who noted that provisions of the act affected the right to privacy of the individual. The aspect of passing the Aadhaar scheme as a money bill was termed unconstitutional in Chandrachud’s dissenting opinion.

Decriminalising Section 377

In September 2018, when the Supreme Court read down Section 377 to decriminalise homosexuality, Justice Chandrachud’s concurring opinion highlighted that this ruling may open the doors for granting wider rights to the sexual minorities.

Entry of women in Sabarimala shrine

Chandrachud was part of the majority opinion in the Sabarimala case which allowed the entry of women of menstruating age to the shrine. Barring the entry of women was seen to be in violation of constitutional principles. The judgment got good and bad reactions and a review of the ruling was subsequently sought. In the review judgment, a majority opinion ruled that the question requires consideration by a larger nine-judge bench. Justice Chandrachud, however, was one of the two dissenters who stood by the original ruling in the case.

Hadiya case

In the “Hadiya love jihad” case which reached all the way to the Supreme Court, the bench of the top court also comprising Chandrachud stressed on the right of a woman who has attained majority to exercise autonomy and the right to make decisions concerning her marriage and choice of adopting a religion.

Decriminalising adultery

Once again speaking for a woman’s autonomy, a top court bench that Chandrachud was part of decriminalised adultery as a punishable offence and noted that the provision was rooted in patriarchal views that sought to subjugate women and deny them bodily and sexual autonomy.

Permanent commission for women in the army

It was a judgment passed by a Chandrachud-led bench that paved the way for granting permanent commissions to women officers in the army. The ruling quoted the famous US Supreme Court judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to establish the prevalence of gender discrimination in the selection criteria at the time.

Freedom of expression and press freedom

Stating that dissent is the safety valve of a democracy, Chandrachud was the sole dissenter in the case concerning the arrest of activists in relation to the Bhima Koregaon case, also known as the Elgar Parishad case. Justice Chandrachud opined that a special investigating team must be formed to probe the matter and had noted that the said arrests under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act may have been in violation of the fundamental rights of the accused persons.

In a criminal case filed against popular anchor and editor in chief of Republic TV, Arnab Goswami, Justice Chandrachud had directed for grant of bail to Goswami while highlighting the importance of the freedom of the press. The ruling has been cited as a precedent in several similar cases since.

Expansion of the right to abortion

Giving a wider interpretation to abortion rights, a Chandrachud-led bench of the Supreme Court recently held that marital status must not affect anyone’s right to seek an abortion. As such, unmarried women also have the right to seek an abortion under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, the ruling said. The judgment is also seen to be a landmark one as it includes persons who are not cisgender women too under its purview. Moreover, this judgment also refers to non-consensual intercourse between married couples as marital rape, which may prove to be pertinent in the case seeking a declaration of marital rape as a punishable offence.