At midnight of 15 August 1947, the Republic of India, once called the golden bird, was freed from the cage it had been stored in for the last 200+ years. An oppressed colony that fought for its independence till its inception was established on the three pillars of democracy, i.e., Legislative, Executive and Judiciary. It was the legislative assembly’s job to make laws, the executive’s job to execute them, and the Judiciary’s job to keep them in check. The judiciary had a stigma around it that just wasn’t present in the legislative and executive. That stigma, however, was on a downfall for the past few years. Then came the 50th CJI of India, and people again started trusting the judiciary. The 50th CJI of India, DY Chandrachud, was much more than a CJI. He was the person who regained the trust of the Indian public.
In his two-year career, he has heard some of the most revolutionary cases in the Indian judiciary’s history. His empathetic approach and progressive judgements were the highlights of his career and what makes him, perhaps, one of the best CJIs of India. However, his tenure wasn’t without its controversies. This is probably because DY Chandrachud has been at the forefront of some of the most influential and important decisions in Indian judiciary history.
Table of Contents
Decriminalisation of Homosexuality
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018). Although DY Chandrachud was CJI for two years, from 2022 to 2024, his experience in the premier court of India has been extensive. He was one of the five judges who unanimously struck down section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. This was a very big deal for Indian society, which has historically been against same-sex relationships and marriage. However, a country’s law should be progressive so that people from all walks of life can feel at home. The gist of democracy is the feeling of acceptance, irrespective of your preferences.
Lessons to Learn: His judgments reflect a deep understanding of social dynamics, teaching leaders to empathise with diverse stakeholders and employees.
Article 370 and Jammu & Kashmir’s Special Status
When India gained independence, many princely states were given the autonomy to accede to the Dominion of India or Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir, however, decided to remain an independent state. However, after a threat from Pakistan, it acceded to India, and the provisions of Article 370 were introduced. Since then, Article 370 has been the reality of J&K. After the NDA government abrogated it, DY Chandrachud presided over the constitution and reviewed it.
Lessons to Learn: Tackling contentious cases highlights the importance of balancing boldness with due diligence in leadership.
Ayodhya Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid Dispute
While Justice Chandrachud was not part of the final 2019 Ayodhya verdict, his prior observations in related cases emphasised fair adjudication of deeply emotive issues. His influence underscored the judiciary’s role in conflict resolution. This is one of the most important and longest-standing issues in independent India.
Lessons to Learn: His ability to navigate highly sensitive cases teaches leaders to mediate conflicts effectively and maintain organisational harmony.
Entry of Women into Sabarimala Temple
The case of the Sabarimala temple was one of the highlight decisions of DY Chandrachud’s career. The case was filed in 2006 by the Young Indian Lawyers Association, claiming the practice of not allowing women in their menstrual cycle in the temple because the temple was dedicated to a celibate deity is unconstitutional and discriminatory. The matter was in the hands of a bench of five Supreme Court judges, who ruled in the favour of the petitioners. Chandrachud Called the restriction a form of “untouchability,” prohibited under Article 17.
Lessons to Learn: By focusing on individual freedoms and societal equality, his approach inspires leaders to foster innovation through progressive thinking.
Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017). This case was something that many did not see coming. The main premise of the case was that documents like Aahdar ask for personal information from the candidates, and sometimes, the information is used in bad faith. K.S. Puttaswamy, a high court judge, asked the Supreme Court of India whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right for the people of India under the protection of Article 21 or not. Some previous precedents stated that the right to privacy is not a fundamental right. However, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court, with DY Chandrachud at the helm, stated that, yes, the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 and sided with the petitioner.
Lessons to learn: Chandrachud’s adherence to constitutional principles reminds leaders to align their strategies with core organisational values.
A Legacy Like None Other
When all is said and done, DY Chandrachud will be remembered as one of the most influential and important CJIs in the annals of history. His commitment to the law has outweighed his personal interest more than once. Throughout his career, Chandrachud has remained the agent of Law and upholded its dignity to the highest order.
