Chief Justice DY Chandrachud completed his last working day on Friday after a two-year tenure at the helm of the Indian judiciary. He will retire on Sunday and hand over the baton to Justice Sanjiv Khanna.
In a fitting end to his tenure, on his last working day, Justice Chandrachud headed a Constitution bench that delivered an important verdict on minority status for the Aligarh Muslim University. In a 4:3 verdict, the bench decided to overturn a 1967 judgment that stripped the university of minority status but said a three-judge bench would decide if it should be granted again.
Here’s a look at some of Justice Chandrachud’s key judgments as the Chief Justice:
Electoral Bonds Case
In February, ahead of this year’s Lok Sabha elections, a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Chandrachud struck down the Electoral Bonds scheme for political funding, which had been in place since 2018.
The scheme, Chief Justice Chandrachud said, was unconstitutional and arbitrary and could lead to a quid pro quo arrangement between political parties and donors.
The bench, also comprising Justices BR Gavai, Sanjiv Khanna, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, directed the State Bank of India (SBI) to stop issuing electoral bonds immediately and ordered the Election Commission of India to publish details of the political parties which have received contributions through electoral bonds since April 2019 on its website.
Private Property Verdict
Earlier this month, a nine-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice Chandrachud, in an 8:1 majority judgment, said all privately owned properties did not qualify as community resources that the State could take over for the common good.
The case related to Article 31C of the Constitution, which protects laws made by the State to fulfill directive principles of state policy. Among them is Article 39B, which stipulates that the State shall direct its policy towards ensuring that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good.
“Does material resource of a community used in 39B include privately owned resources? Theoretically, the answer is yes, the phrase may include privately owned resources. However, this court is unable to subscribe itself to the minority view of Justice Iyer in Ranganath Reddy. We hold that not every resource owned by an individual can be considered a material resource of a community only because it meets the qualifier of material needs,” Chief Justice Chandrachud said.
Article 370
In December 2023, a five-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud upheld the scrapping of Article 370, which granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir.
Chief Justice Chandrachud said Article 370 was a temporary provision to ease Jammu and Kashmir’s merger with India.
The court said that restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir, which was divided into two Union Territories, including Ladakh “shall take place at the earliest and as soon as possible”. It also asked for Assembly elections to be held in Jammu and Kashmir by September 30, 2024.
Same-Sex Marriage
A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Chandrachud had, in October 2023, refused to accord legal recognition to same-sex marriage, saying there was “no unqualified right” to marriage with the exception of those that are recognized by law.
Leaving it to the legislature to take a call on enacting the marriage equality law, the judges also noted the center’s submission that a panel headed by the cabinet secretary will look into practical difficulties faced by same-sex couples. The bench agreed that difficulties faced by queer couples in accessing basic services are discriminatory and said the government panel must look into them.
Section 6A
In October, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of a key citizenship rule that recognized the Assam Accord, granting citizenship to Bangladeshi refugees who had arrived before 1971.
Section 6A of the Citizenship Act was introduced in 1985 to allow refugees from Bangladesh (then East Pakistan), who had entered India between 1966-1971, to register as Indian citizens.
The judgment was delivered by a five-judge Constitutional bench led by Chief Justice Chandrachud with a 4:1 majority.
Caste-Based Discrimination in Prisons
The same month, a bench led by Chief Justice Chandrachud banned caste-based discrimination like division of manual labor, segregation of barracks, and bias against prisoners of de-notified tribes and habitual offenders and held as “unconstitutional” the jail manual rules of 10 states for fostering such biases.
Observing that the “right to live with dignity extends even to the incarcerated,” the bench asked the Center and states to amend their prison manuals and laws within three months, and file compliance reports.
“Criminal laws of the colonial era continue to impact the postcolonial world,” the bench said.
UP Madrasa Law
Earlier this month, a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Chandrachud upheld the validity of a 2004 law that regulates the functioning of madrasas in Uttar Pradesh and set aside an Allahabad High Court judgment that had declared the law unconstitutional and violative of the principle of secularism.
The bench held that the high court had erred in holding that the statute must be struck down if it violates the secularism principle. “The state can regulate the standards of education (in madrasas)… regulations relating to the quality of education do not interfere with the administration of the madrasas,” the Chief Justice said.
NEET-UG Re-Exam
Amid the controversy over a string of paper leaks, the Supreme Court in July refused to cancel the 2024 NEET UG exam for entrance to medical colleges saying that the paper leak was not “systemic” or widespread enough that it affected the “integrity” of the exam.
The bench, headed by Chief Justice Chandrachud, said there wasn’t sufficient material available on the record to order a re-test but clarified that its judgment would not prevent authorities from taking action against candidates who had secured admission using malpractices.
Immunity For MPs And MLAs
In March, a Constitution bench led by Chief Justice Chandrachud ruled that an MP or MLA cannot claim immunity from prosecution if he or she is accused of taking a bribe for a vote or a speech in the legislature.
Noting that corruption and bribery by legislators can potentially destroy the functioning of Indian Parliamentary democracy, the court held that taking a bribe is an independent crime and has no link with what a lawmaker says or does inside the Parliament or legislative Assembly. Hence, the immunity from prosecution enjoyed by lawmakers will not shield them.
Child Marriage
A bench headed by Chief Justice Chandrachud, in October, issued several directions for the effective implementation of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, and said that child marriage deprives children of their agency, autonomy and right to fully develop and enjoy their childhood.
The bench ordered that state governments and Union Territories appoint officers solely responsible for discharging the functions of child marriage prohibition officers at the district level.
“Both sexes are adversely affected by forced and early marriage. Marrying in childhood has the effect of objectifying the child. The practice of child marriage imposes mature burdens on children who are not physically or mentally prepared to comprehend the significance of marriage,” the court said.
