CJI Chandrachud retired, will always be remembered for these 5 decisions

8 November was the last day of DY Chandrachud’s tenure as Chief Justice of India. On his last working day, DY Chandrachud shared thoughts on his judicial journey with gratitude and humility. During this he also appeared emotional. He said that if I have ever hurt anyone in the court, please forgive me for that. As sons of former CJI YV Chandrachud, they were the only father-son duo to reach the post of Chief Justice of India. Justice YV Chandrachud was appointed to the post of CJI in 1978 and retired in 1985. He has served in this post for the longest tenure of seven years. His son, Justice DY Chandrachud, had a tenure of a little more than two years. During his tenure, YV Chandrachud had sentenced Sanjay Gandhi to jail in a case related to the film “Kissa Kursi Ka”. In such a situation, let us tell you about some historical decisions of Justice Chandrachud.

A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court ruled in August 2017 that the right to privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. CJI Chandrachud delivered the judgement, which highlighted that privacy is inherent to liberty and dignity. This decision has since influenced other decisions related to data security, Aadhaar and personal freedom. It all started in 2012 when retired judge KS Puttaswamy challenged the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Act. The Aadhaar Act legalized India’s unique identification number program.

On September 6, 2018, a unanimous five-judge bench of the Supreme Court partially struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), a 158-year-old law that criminalized homosexual relations between consenting adults. Was. The Court ruled that the provisions of the section regarding homosexuality would remain in effect. CJI Chandrachud highlighted the harm caused by Section 377 by marginalizing an entire section of citizens. Citing his earlier judgment in the Puttaswamy case, which affirmed the right to privacy, he argued that denying the right to sexual orientation is also a denial of privacy. He emphasized that human sexuality should not be reduced to a binary or narrowly defined as only a means of reproduction.

Holding electoral bonds unconstitutional, the Supreme Court struck down the electoral bond scheme, which allowed anonymous donations to political parties. The much-awaited judgment by a five-judge Constitution bench held that the electoral bond scheme violates freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Chief Justice Chandrachud struck down the scheme introduced through the Finance Act, 2017, saying information about funding of political parties is necessary for effective exercise of voting choice.

In the most significant judgment, a five-judge bench headed by CJI Chandrachud granted the disputed Ayodhya land to build the Ram temple and directed the Uttar Pradesh government to provide an alternative site in Ayodhya for the construction of the mosque. The verdict came in November 2019, settling the contentious issue that had been going on for more than a century. The Supreme Court set aside the 2010 decision of the Allahabad High Court, which in its judgment had divided the disputed land and given it to temple and mosque trusts for the construction of these structures. CJI Chandrachud had earlier said that he had prayed to God for resolution of the Ayodhya dispute, a comment which created a controversy in the political arena.

CJI Chandrachud expanded the rights of unmarried women, allowing them to seek abortion up to 24 weeks under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, like married women. The judgment emphasized women’s reproductive autonomy, affirming that a woman’s marital status should not affect her rights over her body and her choices regarding pregnancy.