CJI Dr Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud profile

New Delhi, Nov 9 (UNI) Known for

upholding constitutional rights and freedom

of speech and expression, and upholds the

rights of the LGBT class, CJI-Designate

Justice Dr Dhananjaya Yeshwant

Chadrachud, today succeeded as the 50th

CJI, after incumbent CJI Uday Umesh Lalit,

demited the office yesterday on November

08.

Justice Chandrachud’s contemporary, Justice

(Retired) Amar Saran, who was colleague in the Allahabad High Court, during his Allahabad

High Court days from 2013, to May 12, 2016 -- said that hardly anyone knows this fact that

Justice Chandrachud had adopted two daughters, (besides his own children) as their mother

belong to very poor and these two girls are special children. "Justice Chandrachud is a good

human being, apart from being a competent and dynamic and superb judge," Justice (Retd)

Saran said.

"Now-a-days, these two special children, whom Justice Chadrachud adopted, grow up

beautifully and they are doing very well. It is an extraordinary thing, a judge is doing, besides,

delivering his judgment," Justice Saran said.

Justice Chandrachud would have a tenure of two years and would continue to hold the office till

November 10, 2024.

Justice Lalit retired yesterday as the CJI after a brief tenure of 74 days.

Justice Chandrachud’s father, Justice YV Chandrachud was appointed to the post of the 16th CJI

in 1978 and he retired in 1985, serving the longest tenure of seven years at the post till date.

History was today made, when Justice Chadrachud took oath as the 50th CJI, as this will be the

only father-son duo to have reached the position of the CJI so far in the history of Supreme

Court's history.

Justice Chandrachud completed his LLB at Delhi University. He then studied at Harvard

University after receiving the prestigious Inlaks Scholarship. At Harvard, he completed his

Masters in Law (LLM) and Doctorate in Juridical Sciences (SJD).

He practised as an advocate in the Supreme Court and the High Courts of Gujarat, Calcutta,

Allahabad, Madhya Pradesh, and Delhi before becoming a judge of the Bombay High Court.

He appeared before the Company Law Board (CLB), the Monopolies & Restricted Trade

Practices (MRTP) Commission, the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) Board and

National and many State Commissions.

Justice Chandrachud was designated as Senior Advocate by the Bombay High Court in 1998. He

served as the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) of India from 1998 to 2000. As an advocate,

Justice Chandrachud’s most significant cases have involved constitutional and administrative

law, the rights of HIV+ workers, religious and linguistic minority rights, and labour and

industrial laws.

On 29 March 2000, he was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court. He

took oath as the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court on 31 October 2013.

He had delivered amny Notable judgements. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy case, Justice

Chandrachud, as a sole dissenter, held that the Aadhaar was unconstitutionally passed as a

Money Bill. He also reviewed arguments on specific provisions of the Act which affected an

individual’s privacy, dignity and autonomy.

He wrote a separate concurring opinion in the famous Navtej Johar case, that decriminalised

homosexuality, and section 377 (Unnatural Sex) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and made samesex intercourse legal. He held section 377 to be an ‘anachronistic colonial law,’ which violated

the fundamental rights to equality, freedom of expression, life and privacy. He added that this

could only be seen as a first step in guaranteeing LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender)

individuals their constitutional rights.

Justice Chandrachud’s concurring opinion in Shafin Jahan v Ashokan K.M case, upheld Hadiya’s

choice of religion and marriage partner. Hadiya had converted to Islam and married the

petitioner Shafin Jahan, at which point her parents alleged that she had been brainwashed.

Justice Chandrachud reiterated that an adult’s right to make decisions in marriage or religion

falls within her zone of privacy.

In the Sabarimala temple case, he held that the exclusion of women between the ages of 10-50

years from Sabarimala Temple violated the constitutional morality. He further added that it

subverted their autonomy, liberty, and dignity. Uniquely, he held that the custom also violated

Article 17, which prohibits untouchability, as it assigns a notion of impurity to women.

He dissented in Romila Thapar case regarding the arrest of 5 human rights activists for allegedly

instigating violence at Bhima Koregaon and participating in a criminal conspiracy against Prime

Minister Narendra Modi. He stated that the issue was whether the arrests violated the accused of

their fundamental rights to free expression and personal liberty guaranteed by Articles 19 and 21

of the Constitution. He suggested that a Special Investigation Team probe the arrest of the

activists.

UNI SM SHK 1837

Tags: #CJI Dr Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud profile