In an insightful discussion on the evolving role of the judiciary in India, Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud addressed a wide range of topics at the ‘Adda’ event organized by The Indian Express. This interactive session, held just a week before the end of his tenure, saw CJI Chandrachud delve into his thoughts on legacy, judicial balance, and the crucial dialogues fostered by the court.
The National Opinion Editor of The Indian Express, Vandita Mishra, queried the CJI on his perceived legacy, reflecting on his decade-long tenure. Mishra noted, “You have often spoken of two kinds of legacies—one measured by case numbers and another by societal impact.” CJI Chandrachud responded thoughtfully, stating, “While case disposal is essential, the Supreme Court’s larger role is to contribute to societal transformation—be it on gender issues, federalism, or other pressing topics.”
Elaborating on the judiciary’s role beyond mere statistics, he highlighted the challenging balance required in dealing with both routine cases and landmark issues. “We’re not here just to dispose of cases. We’re here to address serious, transformative issues of our time,” he emphasized.
The discussion took an interesting turn when senior journalist Apurva Vishwanath brought up the sensitive topic of same-sex marriage, referencing recent rulings. CJI Chandrachud noted, “As a constitutional court, our role is to foster democratic dialogue in a structured, rational way. Even in the case of same-sex marriage, the aim is to create a safe space for all voices to be heard.”
Addressing the perception challenges judges face in an era of live-streamed court proceedings and 24/7 scrutiny, CJI Chandrachud remarked, “COVID was a game changer. Our discussions are no longer limited to the courtroom; they resonate across the nation and even globally. It’s essential for judges to be mindful of the impact of every word spoken.”
As the conversation shifted to two recent controversies surrounding the judiciary’s independence, Mishra raised concerns about the CJI’s interactions with the Prime Minister. Referring specifically to images of the CJI attending private events with the PM, she asked if such moments blur the boundaries between the judiciary and the executive.
CJI Chandrachud firmly responded, “At a doctrinal level, the separation of powers doesn’t mean antagonism between the judiciary and the executive. Meetings and interactions, whether for administrative matters or at social events, do not impinge on judicial independence. For instance, the PM’s visit to my home was a private event. There’s absolutely nothing wrong in that. The judiciary’s work is constantly scrutinized by our written judgments, which are open to all.”
On a lighter note, he also addressed social media’s tendency to amplify certain remarks. “People often miss the broader context of our discussions,” he explained, sharing an example where he spoke about finding calm amidst judicial conflicts during a visit to his village.
As his tenure draws to a close, CJI Chandrachud leaves behind a legacy marked by transparency, openness, and a judiciary that values both justice and democratic dialogue, even amidst increasing polarization in society. “In the end,” he concluded, “our work is judged by the integrity and openness with which we conduct ourselves.”
