Justice Dhanajaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, the son of India’s longest-serving chief justice YV Chandrachud, assumed office as the 50th Chief Justice of India on November 8, 2022. Friday was his last working day at the Supreme Court of India. He retires on Sunday as the CJI.
Like Chandrachud Sr, the outgoing CJI, too, heard and delivered some of the historic judgments — from the right to privacy and the protection of children’s rights to the Ayodhya ruling, the decriminalisation of homosexuality and the striking down of the Electoral Bonds Scheme.
Let’s take a look at the seven top judgements that Justice Chandrachud delivered as the CJI during his two-year tenure.
Protection against climate change a fundamental right
The case was officially called the MK Ranjitsinh and others vs the Union of India. In this landmark judgement, Justice Chandrachud expanded the interpretation of two fundamental rights — the right to Life (guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution) and the Right to Equality (Article 14).
The court ruled that protection from environmental factors such as climate change is a fundamental right and it is the responsibility of the state to protect the environment. The citizens should also be compassionate with the living creatures.
Protection of children from sexual abuse
This judgement came in the Just Rights for Children Alliance Case. Justice Chandrachud, in a landmark judgement, overturned the Madras High Court ruling to clarify that the possession of child pornographic material with specific intent is a crime under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences or Pocso Act.
Earlier, in an erroneous ruling, the Madras High Court had said that possessing child pornographic material was not an offence.
However, Justice Chandrachud’s bench overturned the ruling and directed India’s Women and Child Development Ministry to spread awareness about the legal and ethical implications of child pornography.
The judgement also proposed to avoid using the word “child pornography” and substitute it with “CSEAM — Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Material”. The top court also instructed the lower courts to use CSEAM in all court proceedings and judgements.
After this historic move, India joined the list of countries that had criminalised the explicit viewing of child pornography.
Electoral Bonds Scheme unconstitutional
It was one of the most politically sensitive cases that reached the courts in recent times — the Association for Democratic Reforms vs Union of India case. The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) challenged the government’s scheme for political funding through the sale of electoral bonds in the Supreme Court.
CJI Chandrachud-led the five-judge Constitution Bench heard the case and found that the scheme lacked constitutional backing. The bench struck it down, ending the ambitious programme of the government, which had billed the scheme as one to clean up the political funding processes in India.
The top court directed that the sale of electoral bonds through banks must be stopped with immediate effect. The scheme introduced in 2017 during the Union Budget presentation ended in February this year with the unanimous verdict of the court.
The scheme was found to violate the Right to Information, declared a fundamental right under Article 19 (1)(a). The top court ordered the State Bank of India (SBI), which sold the bonds, to share the details of the electoral bonds purchased from April 12, 2019, to the Election Commission of India (ECI) and publish the same on the official website to ensure transparency and free flow of information.
Scheduled Castes are not a homogenous class
In the State of Punjab vs Davinder Singh case, CJI Chandrachud-led:seven-judge bench overruled the EV Chinnaiah’s judgement, allowing them to make sub-classifications within Scheduled Castes (SCs). The earlier judgement had barred the states from sub-categorisation of the SCs.
With a 6:1 majority, the top court declared that the Scheduled Castes were not a homogenous class. The judgement explained that the sub-categorisation of the SCs did not violate Article 14 or Article 341(2).
The states have the responsibility to relocate benefits equally and effectively, it ruled. The judgement has significant implications for the execution of quota policies in government jobs and higher education.
Redistribution of private property
Just days before his retirement, CJI Chandrachud headed a nine-judge Constitution Bench that pronounced a significant judgement interpreting Article 39(b) regarding the government’s power over private property.
The ruling has crucial implications for private ownership of property. The bench ruled that the government cannot acquire and redistribute all privately owned properties deeming them “material resources of the community”, as mentioned in Article 39(b) of the Constitution.
Aligarh Muslim University’s minority tag
On November 8, a seven-judge bench of the top court headed by CJI Chandrachud overruled its 1967 judgement, saying that an institution established by statute could not claim minority status. This disqualified the Aligarh Muslim University from claiming the minority institution tag.
The new judgement, in a majority view of 4:3, ruled that the idea behind the origin and “founding mind” behind an institution should determine its eligibility under Article 30 for claiming a minority status. Article 30 protects the rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.
The ultimate question of AMU’s minority status has now been referred to a regular bench for factual examination. But the judgement paves the way for restoration of the minority status of the Aligarh Muslim University.
Cracking the whip on bar councils
In the Gaurav Kumar vs Union of India case, CJI Chandrachud’s bench delivered a landmark judgement ruling that the bar councils cannot charge beyond statutory limits. The statutory limit is mentioned in Section 24 (1)(f) and must be imposed with strict regulations.
The charges are Rs 750 for advocates belonging to the general category and Rs 125 for advocates belonging to the SC/ST category.
Link to article –
Justice Chandrachud retires after 2 years as CJI, a look at his top 7 judgements
