List of 9 Landmark Judgements by CJI Chandrachud! Everything You Need to Know

Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud is an Indian jurist and the 50th Chief Justice of India. He is the son of the longest-serving CJI Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud. President Droupadi Murmu appointed DY Chandrachud to replace Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit in November 2022.

Chandrachud was known for his progressive judgment and commitment to upholding the Constitution of India. He is widely considered one of the Supreme Court’s most influential and respected justices.

In May 2016, he was appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court of India. He also served as the Chief Judge of the Allahabad High Court from 2013 to 2016 and as a Judge of the Bombay High Court from 2000 to 2013.

Justice Chandrachud was one of the most prolific judges of the Supreme Court, delivering over 220 decisions during his tenure. Here are some of his famous judgments.

1. Right to privacy as a fundamental right (KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017)

The case arose out of retired judge KS Puttaswamy’s questioning of the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar scheme, which he said violated personal privacy and autonomy. The government considers the scheme vital to delivering benefits.

The Supreme Court therefore convened a nine-judge bench to consider whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Constitution of India. Justice DY Chandrachud, while writing the lead judgment, emphasized the importance of privacy in a democratic society.

On August 24, 2017, the Court unanimously declared that the right to privacy is indeed a fundamental right indispensable to personal dignity and autonomy.

This landmark ruling set the stage for subsequent challenges to the Aadhaar scheme and reinforced the idea that personal data must be protected from arbitrary state interference.

2. Decriminalization of Section 377 (Navtej Johar v. Union of India, 2018)

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code criminalizes consensual same-sex relations, leading to discrimination and persecution of LGBTQ+ individuals. Activists believe the colonial-era law violates fundamental rights.

A five-judge Constitution Bench was constituted to hear petitions challenging Article 377. Justice Chandrachud wrote a unanimous opinion arguing against criminalizing conduct between consensual adults.

On September 6, 2018, the Supreme Court decriminalized Section 377, stating that sexual orientation is an inherent part of human dignity.

The judgment emphasizes that everyone should have equal rights regardless of sexual orientation, marking a major victory for LGBTQ+ rights in India.

3. Hadiya Marriage Case (Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan KM, 2018)

The case involves Hadiya, a woman who converted to Islam and married a Muslim man. Her father challenged the marriage, claiming it was a marriage of force and sought an annulment.

The Supreme Court must balance individual autonomy with family and social pressures. Justice Chandrachud emphasized individual freedom and the right to choose a partner.

On March 8, 2018, the court upheld Hadiya’s marriage, saying adults had the right to make decisions about marriage and religion without outside interference.

This judgment reinforces individual freedom and personal choice in love and faith.

4. Abortion rights of unmarried women (2021)

The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act primarily limits abortion access to married women or the specific circumstances of unmarried women, reflecting outdated patriarchal norms.

A petition has been filed challenging the restrictions. Justice Chandrachud led a panel of judges to examine whether the restrictions constituted discrimination against unmarried women.

In a progressive ruling delivered on International Safe Abortion Day on September 29, 2021, the Supreme Court extended the right to abortion under the MTP Act to also unmarried women.

Justice Chandrachud asserted that the law should not discriminate on the basis of marital status and must reflect contemporary social values ​​regarding women’s autonomy.

5. Sabarimala Case (Young Lawyers Association of India v. State of Kerala, 2018)

The Sabarimala temple prohibits entry of women of menstruating age citing religious customs. This practice is considered discriminatory against women’s rights.

The five-judge bench was tasked with assessing whether such restrictions violated constitutional rights to equality and religious freedom.

On September 28, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that the ban on women entering Sabarimala was unconstitutional.

Justice Chandrachud emphasized that this practice was discriminatory and amounted to untouchability, thus violating the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

6. Decriminalization of adultery (Joseph Shine v. Union of India, 2018)

Section 497 of the IPC criminalizes adultery but penalizes only men who engage in extramarital affairs while treating women as property rather than persons with agency.

The Supreme Court examined whether the law violated constitutional rights related to gender equality and personal freedoms.

On September 27, 2018, Justice Chandrachud declared Section 497 unconstitutional.

He stressed that the law must reflect modern values ​​on relationships and personal autonomy, thereby strengthening gender equality in love and fidelity.

7. Living will recognizing passive euthanasia (Common Cause v. Union of India, 2018)

Because living wills are not recognized by law, terminally ill patients are unable to choose passive euthanasia, leaving them with long-term suffering against their will.

A petition seeks clarification on whether individuals can determine their end-of-life care through a living will.

On March 9, 2018, the Supreme Court recognized that a living will is a valid document for passive euthanasia under certain conditions.

Justice Chandrachud said individuals have the right to die with dignity and have the right to choose medical treatment when faced with a terminal illness.

8. Supertech twin towers demolition (2021)

The construction of Supertech’s twin towers in Noida violated building norms and safety regulations, raising concerns over public safety.

A petition has been filed seeking action against these illegal structures due to the potential risks they pose to residents and neighboring buildings.

On August 31, 2021, Justice Chandrachud ordered the demolition of the Supertech twin towers within three months due to their illegal status.

He stressed that compliance with building regulations is critical to city safety and governance integrity.

9. Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2023)

The power struggle between the Delhi government and the lieutenant governor over control of administrative services has raised questions about governance in Delhi.

The Supreme Court needs to clarify the scope of powers possessed by the two entities under the Constitution.

On May 11, 2023, Justice Chandrachud ruled that the Delhi government has control over all services except land and law enforcement related services.

This judgment strengthens democratic governance by confirming the authority of elected representatives over the administrative functions of Delhi.

in conclusion

These landmark judgments delivered by CJI Chandrachud set a precedent for future cases and were widely praised for his progressive approach to justice.

One of the topics was Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which CJI Chandrachud interpreted in a new way and had an important impact on citizenship in India.

Another important judgment that attracted attention was MK Ranjitsinh v Union of India, which delves into the steps required to protect the Great Indian Bustard from potential extinction.

Source: Supreme Court

Information about these judgments comes mainly from the official website of the Supreme Court, which contains several landmark judgments.

These judgments highlight the critical role of the judiciary in formulating and interpreting laws that have far-reaching consequences for society.

Also Read | List of Chief Justices of India