D.Y. Chandrachud is one of the most famous Chief Justices of India. The full name of the 50th Chief Justice of India is Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud. He is known for standing up for what he believes is right, even if others disagree. He has made many important decisions and is working to make the government more open and honest.
He is the son of Y.V. Chandrachud, and Prabha Chandrachud. His father was the 16th Chief Justice of India, and his mom was a singer at All India Radio.. D.Y. Chandrachud became the Chief Justice in November 2022 and will retire in November 2024. During his time as Chief Justice, he has been involved in major cases like the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, changes to Article 370, and same-sex marriage.
advertisement
EARLY LIFE & EDUCATION.
D.Y. Chandrachud was born in Pune into a Marathi Brahmin family (Deshastha Rigvedi Brahmin). He went to school in Mumbai(Cathedral and John Connon School, Mumbai) and Delhi(St. Columba’s School, Delhi). After finishing school, he studied Economics and Mathematics at St. Stephen’s College in Delhi. Then, he studied law at Delhi University and graduated in 1982.
In '83, he jetted off to Harvard Law School in the US and scored a Master's degree in law. He stayed at Harvard until 1986 to complete his Doctorate, where he studied affirmative action (Doctoral Thesis). After finishing his studies, he became a lawyer and joined the Bar Council of Maharashtra.
Profile of Chief Justice D. Y. Chandrachud
Date and Place of Birth: Born on 11 November 1959 in Bombay, Bombay State, India (present-day Mumbai, Maharashtra).
Present Age: As of 2024, Chief Justice D. Y. Chandrachud is 64 years old.
Spouse(s): He was married to Rashmi Chandrachud, who unfortunately passed away in 2007 due to cancer. He is currently married to Kalpana Das, a lawyer.
Family:
- Father: Y. V. Chandrachud
- Sons: Abhinav Chandrachud and Chintan Chandrachud
- Daughters: Priyanka and Mahi (foster daughters)
Education and Qualifications:
- Alma Mater: University of Delhi (BA, LLB), Harvard University (LLM, SJD)
- Academic Background: He graduated with a BA in Economics Honours from St. Stephen's College, New Delhi. He then completed his LLB from Campus Law Centre, Delhi University in 1982. Later, he obtained his LLM degree and a Doctorate in Juridical Sciences (SJD) from Harvard Law School, USA in 1986.
Retirement Date: Chief Justice D. Y. Chandrachud is set to retire on November 10, 2024.
Succession: After his retirement, Justice Sanjiv Khanna will assume the position of Chief Justice of India, serving from November 11, 2024, to May 13, 2025.
advertisement
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s Career.
After studying law at Delhi University, D.Y. Chandrachud worked as a junior lawyer, helping other lawyers and judges. He also worked with the well-known lawyer Fali Nariman.
After graduating from Harvard, he briefly worked at a law firm (Sullivan & Cromwell LLP) in the United States. He then returned to India and practiced law at the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court of India.
So, in 1998, he became a senior lawyer and got the cool title of Additional Solicitor General of India. Then, in March 2000, he became a judge at the Bombay High Court. Not only that, but he also served as the director of the Maharashtra Judicial Academy.
On 31st October 2013, he became the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, where he served for almost three years. On 13 March 2016, he was promoted to the Supreme Court of India. Since 2021, he has been part of a group of senior judges that decides on the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts.
On 9 November 2022, D.Y. Chandrachud was appointed as the 50th Chief Justice of India.
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s Influential Court Decisions.
advertisement
Right to Privacy Verdict
In the 2017 case led by Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, a group of nine judges, including Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, agreed that the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. Justice Chandrachud wrote a key part of this judgment, strongly criticizing an earlier 2014 decision that had ruled against LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) rights.
He made it clear that LGBT rights are real and protected by the Constitution, and that privacy and sexual freedom are essential to personal identity and dignity. In his judgment, Justice Chandrachud also criticized a 1976 case decision that his own father had been a part of, calling it “seriously flawed.”
This was a notable moment, as it showed a shift in the understanding of fundamental rights. To quote from the judgment “Dignity cannot exist without privacy. Both reside within the inalienable values of life, liberty and freedom which the Constitution has recognised. Privacy is the ultimate expression of the sanctity of the individual. It is a constitutional value which straddles across the spectrum of fundamental rights and protects for the individual a zone of choice and self. Determination.”
The Historic Shift, Decriminalizing Section 377
D.Y. Chandrachud was one of the five judges who decided to decriminalize gay sex between consenting adults in the 2018 case Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India. They struck down part of a 158-year-old colonial law under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
While giving the judgment, Justice Chandrachud emphasized that this case was not just about changing a law, but about recognizing the equal rights and existence of the LGBT community, just like any other citizens.
advertisement
The Impact of Bhobishyoter Bhoot Screening
In 2019, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud dropped a bomb of a judgment in the case of (Indibility Creative Pvt Ltd v. State of West Bengal). He smacked the West Bengal government with a fine and ordered them to pay compensation for blocking the screening of a political satire movie called ‘Bhobishyoter Bhoot’.
The Supreme Court ruled that the ban was unconstitutional because it violated the filmmakers' right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Justice Chandrachud emphasized that "free speech cannot be silenced because of the fear of how people might react."
UPSC Jihad Case
In 2020, a case was brought to the Supreme Court about a TV show called "UPSC Jihad" on Sudarshan TV. The show suggested that Muslims were trying to secretly join India's government jobs. A group of three judges, led by Justice Chandrachud, looked into the case.
They said that while the TV channel has the right to report on important issues, it should not make hurtful comments about the entire Muslim community. The show had scenes with flames and images of Muslims in religious clothing, which the judges found offensive.
When the lawyer for Sudarshan TV argued that stopping the show would violate freedom of speech, Justice Chandrachud replied that the channel should be careful because India is a country with many different cultures. The court eventually stopped the channel from airing the remaining episodes of the show.
advertisement
Expanding the Concept of Family
In 2022, the Supreme Court made an important decision in the case of Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal. The court expanded the definition of "family" to include different types of relationships, like unmarried couples or same-sex partnerships.
A nurse named Deepika Singh wanted to take maternity leave after having her first kid. But guess what? Her workplace, PGIMER in Chandigarh, said no way! Why? Because she had already used maternity leave to take care of her husband's kids from a previous marriage. Even the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Punjab and Haryana High Court were like, "Nope, sorry, no maternity leave for you!"
A two-judge bench, including Justice Chandrachud and Justice Bopanna, ruled in favor of Deepika. They stated that different forms of families, even if they are not traditional, are just as valid and deserve legal protection. They also clarified that childcare leave and maternity leave are separate, and a woman is entitled to both.
Suicide Abetment Case
In 2018, Justice Chandrachud made a big call when he said that Arnab Goswami, the big cheese at Republic TV, could get out of jail on bail. Arnab was in the slammer because the Mumbai police thought he had something to do with the whole suicide thing involving an interior designer named Anvay Naik and his mom. Justice Chandrachud said it's super important that we don't use those criminal laws to go after people who don't deserve it.
advertisement
Sabarimala Verdict
On September 28, 2018, the Supreme Court, in a 4-1 decision, ruled that banning women of menstrual age from entering a temple violated their fundamental rights. The majority of the judges, including former Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A M Khanwilkar, Rohinton Nariman, and D Y Chandrachud, agreed on this decision.
However, Justice Indu Malhotra disagreed. In the famous "Sabarimala Case" Justice Chandrachud wrote that the Constitution does not allow women to be excluded from worship just because they are of menstruating age. He argued that this exclusion was an insult to women's equal rights and dignity. Excluding women from religious worship because of their natural bodily functions goes against the principles of equal citizenship.
advertisement
Quashing the Adultery Law
On September 27, 2018, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, including Justice DY Chandrachud, ruled that the adultery law in India was unconstitutional. The law, known as Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, made it a crime for a man to have consensual sexual relations with another man's wife without the husband's permission.
The man could be fined or sent to jail for up to five years, but the woman was not punished. Justice Chandrachud explained that this law treated women as property of their husbands, taking away their independence. He said the law violated the principles of freedom, dignity, and equality guaranteed by the Constitution.
The court decided that adultery should not be a crime, though it could still be a valid reason for divorce. Interestingly, in 1985, Justice Chandrachud's father, who was also a Chief Justice of India, had upheld the validity of this law.
advertisement
Abortion Rights
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, including Justices DY Chandrachud, JB Pardiwala, and AS Bopanna, ruled that all women, whether married or unmarried, have the right to safe and legal abortions up to 24 weeks of pregnancy.
The court said that treating married and unmarried women differently under abortion laws is unfair and unconstitutional. In this important decision, Justice Chandrachud also recognized that marital rape, where a husband forces his wife to have sex, is a crime. The court affirmed that women have the right to an abortion even in such cases.
Equal Roles for Women in the Army
In a landmark 2020 decision, the Supreme Court, led by Justices DY Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi, ordered the government to grant permanent commissions to women officers in the Army, ending gender bias. The court emphasized the importance of equality, stating that outdated stereotypes, like men being dominant and women being primary caretakers, need to change.
This ruling was based on a case filed by advocate Babita Puniya in 2003, who argued that female officers should have the same opportunities as their male counterparts.
The court's decision also addressed the Army's discriminatory promotion practices, ensuring that women officers could hold command positions. Soon after, Justice Chandrachud also ruled in favor of women sailors in the Indian Navy, granting them similar rights. This decision was widely recognized for advancing gender equality in the military.
advertisement
Recognition of Marital Rape as Crime
In a landmark decision, Justice DY Chandrachud ruled that a husband's forced sexual act on his wife can be considered rape. He explained that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act recognizes a husband's act of sexual assault or forced intercourse with his wife as 'rape'. This ruling acknowledges that even within a marriage, a woman has the right to say no and that her consent matters.
Love Jihad
In the Hadiya case (Shafin Jahan v Ashokan K.M.), the Supreme Court decided that Hadiya (formerly Akhila Ashokan) and Shafin Jehan's marriage was valid, even though Hadiya's family challenged it. The case was widely discussed in the media as an example of "love jihad." Justice Chandrachud supported Hadiya's right to choose her own religion and marriage partner.
He emphasized that adults have the right to make their own decisions about marriage and religion as part of their personal privacy.
advertisement
Same-Sex Marriage Case
In October 2023, the Supreme Court of India decided not to legally recognize same-sex marriages. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, while announcing the decision, said that making laws is the job of Parliament, not the courts. He mentioned that only Parliament can change the Special Marriage Act to include same-sex marriages.
However, Justice Chandrachud did rule against a regulation by the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) that prevented queer and unmarried couples from adopting children. Despite this, the Supreme Court, in a 3:2 decision, still denied queer couples the right to adopt children.
Controversy: Alleged Misuse of Office:
In October 2022, a complaint was filed against Justice DY Chandrachud by Rashid Khan Pathan and two others, accusing him of misusing his position. They claimed that Justice Chandrachud had made decisions in a case that was supposedly related to another case where his son appeared in the Bombay High Court.
Rashid Khan Pathan, who claimed to lead a group called the 'Supreme Court and High Court Litigant Association,' sent the complaint to the President of India and others. The Bar Council of India (BCI) supported Justice Chandrachud and condemned the complaint, calling it a "deliberate attempt to malign the Indian judiciary."
advertisement
Legacy and Impact
Justice DY Chandrachud's legacy is characterized by his commitment to modernizing the judiciary and enhancing access to justice through technology. He has been instrumental in pioneering the use of virtual court hearings, a significant transformation that gained momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic.
His leadership in this area ensured the continuity of judicial proceedings despite the nationwide lockdown, thereby preventing the backlog of cases and ensuring timely justice. This move not only underscored his forward-thinking approach but also set a precedent for future judicial processes in India to incorporate technological advancements.
Moreover, Justice Chandrachud has been a staunch advocate for judicial independence and accountability. He emphasized the importance of a transparent judiciary free from external influences, thereby strengthening the rule of law in India.
His decisions often reflected a deep understanding of the socio-economic realities of the country, aiming to make the law more accessible and equitable for all citizens, particularly marginalized communities.
His efforts to broaden the definition of family and his progressive stance on women's rights and LGBTQ+ issues have had a lasting impact on the legal landscape, promoting a more inclusive and just society.
Justice Chandrachud's tenure is also marked by his focus on legal education and mentorship. He has consistently engaged with law students and young lawyers, encouraging them to think critically about the law and its role in society. His lectures and writings have inspired a new generation of legal professionals to pursue justice with integrity and empathy.
advertisement
Awards and Recognitions
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud has received numerous awards and recognition for his exemplary contributions to law and justice. During his academic years, he was awarded an Inlaks Scholarship, which is offered to Indian citizens pursuing graduate education abroad, highlighting his early promise and dedication to legal studies.
At Harvard Law School, he was honored with the prestigious Joseph H. Beale Prize for securing the highest marks in Conflict of Laws. In 2023, he was honored with the prestigious 'Award for Global Leadership' by the Harvard Law School Center on the Legal Profession, recognizing his significant impact on the global legal community and his dedication to justice and equality.
Furthermore, his contributions to legal education and mentorship have been widely acknowledged, as he has played a pivotal role in nurturing the next generation of legal professionals through various initiatives and programs. These accolades not only celebrate his legal acumen but also his dedication to fostering a more just and equitable society.
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud's career is a testament to his unwavering commitment to justice, equality, and legal reform. From his early academic achievements to his significant rulings as the Chief Justice of India, he has consistently demonstrated a profound understanding of the law and its impact on society.
His leadership in modernizing the judiciary, advocating for fundamental rights, and ensuring access to justice through technology has set a benchmark for future judicial practices. His landmark judgments on issues like privacy, LGBTQ+ rights, and gender equality have reshaped the legal landscape in India, promoting a more inclusive and equitable society.
As Justice Chandrachud's tenure continues, his legacy will undoubtedly be remembered for its transformative influence on the Indian legal system and its dedication to upholding the principles of justice and human rights.
advertisement
REFERENCES:
- Justice Y.V. Chandrachud
- Timeline: Key Events in the Babri Masjid – Ram Mandir Controversy
- Abrogation of Article 370
- Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1011 of 2022
- CJI Chandrachud to be conferred with 'Award for Global Leadership' by Harvard Law School Center
- Fali Nariman: A life dedicated to the Constitution’s promise
- Who is CJI Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud? All you need to know about the 50th Chief Justice of India
- Who is Justice DY Chandrachud: 10 things your child should know about him
- D.Y. Chandrachud
- Denied Dreams: The Struggle for Same-Sex Couples Adoption Rights in India
advertisement
- Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) vs Union Of India on 26 September, 2018
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
- The Section 377 of Indian Penal Code
- Indibility Creative Pvt Ltd v. State of West Bengal
- Hate speech reinforces communal divides’: Petitioner in Sudarshan TV’s ‘UPSC Jihad’ case
- Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal
- Republic TV editor Arnab Goswami, two others arrested in abetment to suicide case
- Judgement in Plain English Sabarimala Temple Entry
- Section 497 of Indian Penal Code
advertisement
- Averse” to stilling heart of a viable foetus: Supreme Court rejects plea for termination of 26-week pregnancy
- ‘Not enough to proudly state that women officers are allowed to serve the nation in the Armed Forces’; Army’s evaluation of Women SSC Officers for grant of permanent commission arbitrary: SC
- Criminalising Marital Rape in India
- Shafin Jahan v Ashokan K.M.
- Complaint Against Justice DY Chandrachud Alleges Misuse Of Position, Bar Council Of India Condemns Allegations
Written by Ruthvik Nayaka
Ruthvik Nayaka is a final year law student, his interests lies in areas including, but not limited to Corporate Law and taxation law. He is also the EN-ROADS Climate Ambassador. He facilities climate-workshop, climate action simulation game and group meetings.
advertisement
Further Reading
advertisement
