7 Most Famous Judgements by Justice Chandrachud for Judiciary Exams

Overview: This blog discusses important judgments by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, vital for judiciary exam preparation. Understanding his rulings helps aspirants grasp the qualities of a good judge.

It's not just about exam scores but also about showcasing fairness and righteous decision-making. Let's explore these cases to integrate legal wisdom and impartiality into our preparation & conduct. So, let's begin!

In this article, we will cover:

• Background and legal philosophy of Justice Chandrachud.
• Importance of his landmark judgments for judiciary exams.
• Summaries of major rulings: Right to Privacy, decriminalization of Section 377, gender equality in the armed forces, and abortion rights.
• Coverage of recent cases on environmental issues, consumer rights, corruption, and financial fraud.
• Examination of significant verdicts like Ayodhya and same-sex marriage.
• Access to FREE downloadable notes for judiciary exam preparation.

Download FREE Study Material for Judiciary by Judiciary Gold

Who is Justice Chandrachud?

Born on 11 November 1959, Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud is currently the Supreme Court Chief Justice of India.

He is a former judge of the Bombay High Court and the former Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court. He currently serves as the executive chairman of the National Legal Services Authority. He was appointed as the Chief Justice of India on 17 October 2022.

Justice Chandrachud is famous for his pragmatic approach to complicated legal topics. Instead of following the route of stereotypical judgments, he disrupts it. Rather, he gives the judgments as per the present needs of society. 

Learn More: How to Prepare for Judiciary Exams?

Download FREE 6 Month Judiciary Strategy by Judiciary Gold

7 Most Famous Judgement by Justice Chandrachud for Judiciary Exams

Sneha and Riya, judiciary aspirants, were discussing their ideal judges. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud was Sneha’s favorite judge. She was impressed by his wise and practical judgments in favor of the general good of mankind. 

But, Riya was unaware of the famous judgments by Justice Chandrachud for judiciary exams. She had only heard the titles of the judgments but had no idea that Hon’ble DY Chandrachud was the lawyer’s lawyer and the go-to man for most complex issues at the Supreme Court. Sneha took upon herself the task of explaining the top five judgments by Hon’ble Chanrdachud.

Do you also want to know Justice Chandrachud's most famous judgments for the judiciary exams? If yes, go through the following judgments now. 

Download Toppers Strategy to make notes by Judiciary Gold

1. Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors

Popularly known as the ‘Right to Privacy Judgement,’ this is one of the most prominent judgments by Justice Chandarchud for judiciary exams. In the Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. vs. Union Of India affirmed that the right to privacy is constitutionally guaranteed.

Chandrachud grounded the right to privacy in dignity, liberty, autonomy, bodily and mental integrity, self-determination, and a spectrum of protected rights. He wrote for himself and three other judges: 

“Dignity cannot exist without privacy. Both reside within the inalienable values of life, liberty, and freedom. Privacy is the ultimate expression of the sanctity of the individual. Privacy is a constitutional value that covers the fundamental rights and protects individual choice and self-determination.”

Due to this judgment, the Right to Privacy was included as the Constitutional Fundamental Right under Article 21 by the nine-judge bench. Justice Chandrachud was the only person who dissented from the Adhaar Act. He concluded that it was a complete violation of citizens' privacy. Thus, he dissented by saying the Adhaar Act was unconstitutional. 

Learn More: Judgement Writing Tips for Judiciary Exams 

Download FREE Independence of Judiciary Notes by Judiciary Gold

2. Navtej Singh Johar v/s Union of India

In 2018, Navtej Singh Johar v/s Union of India was pronounced. This is counted amongst the most famous judgments by Justice Chandachud for judiciary exams. This case discusses Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code 1860. 

Section 377 is a historical judgment of British India. It states that “whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the course of nature with any woman, man, or animal shall be punished.” 

This prohibits private consensual sex between adults of the same sex. The provisions of Section 377 apply to non-consensual carnal intercourse with adults, acts of bestiality, and all acts of carnal intercourse with minors.

However, if carnal intercourse is done with the consent of two adults of the same sex, it cannot be held unconstitutional. Prohibiting adults of the same sex for carnal intercourse under Section 377 is a direct violation of their right to privacy. 

Thus, the Navtej Singh Johar v/s Union of India case states that Section 377 is partially unconstitutional. 

Learn More: Important Judgement Writing Questions

Download Union and Its Territory Notes by Judiciary Gold

3. The Secretary, Ministry of Defence v Babita Puniya

The Babita Puniya case was a major judgment on gender justice and the armed forces of India. This is the most notable judgment by Justice Chandrachud for Judiciary Exams. 

The Union Government thought that "women weren’t employed on hazardous duties, unlike their male counterparts in the same Service. Physical differences between men and women also contributed to lower standards."

Justice Chandrachud directed the government to consider all women appointed in the Army on Short Service Commissions for the grant of Permanent Commissions on an equal basis with their male counterparts. 

This judgment was reported by international media as a "landmark verdict ending gender bias." It was a major step taken against patriarchal mindsets and strong institutional biases in India. 

Download Limitation Act notes by Judiciary Gold

4. The Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of NCT of Delhi

It is the most recent landmark judgment by Justice Chandrachud for Judiciary Exams. In this case, an unmarried pregnant woman wanted to terminate her pregnancy on certain personal grounds. However, she was prohibited from doing so. 

As per the Medical Termination of Pregnancy provisions, only a married woman with 20-24 months of pregnancy is eligible to abort her child, provided she fulfills the necessary conditions. 

Justice Chandchud clearly stated that a woman has the right to her own body. No one can snatch that right from her. Now, all women or their partners, not specifically husbands, are allowed to terminate their pregnancy irrespective of their marital status. This is the turning point in the medical laws of India. 

Learn More: Judgement Writing Tips & Tricks for Criminal Law

Download Constitution Overview Notes by Judiciary Gold

5. Shimla Development Plan 2041 case

In this case, Justice Chandrachud addressed a dispute over the implementation of the development plan for Shimla. This case, titled State of Himachal Pradesh and Others v. Yogendra Mohan Sengupta and Another, highlighted a conflict between the Himachal Pradesh government and the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The NGT had previously halted all construction activities in the ecologically sensitive areas of Shimla, raising concerns over environmental protection. However, the Supreme Court criticized the NGT's stringent directives, asserting that they did not align with the principles of judicial propriety, especially considering the concurrent jurisdiction of the Himachal Pradesh High Court over the matter.

Justice Chandrachud and the bench allowed the Himachal Pradesh government to proceed with the Development Plan as published in June 2023, marking a significant decision in favour of sustainable development and urban planning. This judgment underscores the Supreme Court's pragmatic approach to balancing environmental concerns with developmental needs, illustrating Justice Chandrachud's commitment to ensuring that legal directives harmonize with broader societal and governmental objectives.

Download CPC notes by Judiciary Gold

6. Right To Clean Air Case

In the landmark 2024 case "Container Corporation of India Ltd vs Ajay Khera and Others," Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud emphasized the universal right to clean air. The case revolved around the National Green Tribunal's (NGT) suggestion to divert trucks entering Delhi to reduce pollution. The NGT had proposed rerouting trucks to Inland Container Depots outside the National Capital Region to alleviate pollution in Delhi. However, the Supreme Court criticized this suggestion, asserting that the right to clean air extends beyond the residents of Delhi to all citizens.

The bench, including Justice Chandrachud, underlined the need for equitable environmental justice, indicating that measures to combat pollution should not unjustly favour one region over others. This judgment underscores the Supreme Court's commitment to environmental rights and the principle that clean air is a fundamental right accessible to every citizen, not just a privileged few residing in specific areas.

Download Important CPC Questions by Judiciary Gold

7. Electoral Bonds Case

In 2024, the Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, delivered a landmark judgment in the case Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, striking down the electoral bonds scheme as unconstitutional. This unanimous decision by a five-judge bench, including Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, marked a significant moment for Indian democracy.

The scheme, introduced through amendments in the Finance Act, of 2017, aimed to anonymize donations to political parties, allowing individuals and corporations to buy bonds issued by the State Bank of India (SBI) and donate them to political parties of their choice. This was intended to clean political funding by facilitating donations through banking channels and granting tax exemptions for such contributions. However, it faced criticism for allowing unlimited, anonymous funding, potentially leading to a lack of transparency in political financing.

The Court found that the scheme infringed on the right to information, vital for a free and fair election, and violated Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. It directed the SBI to stop issuing electoral bonds and mandated the disclosure of details regarding political parties that received funds through these bonds since 2019 to the Election Commission of India (ECI), which is to publish these details on its official website. This judgment reaffirms the importance of transparency and accountability in political funding, emphasizing the electorate's right to be fully informed.

Read More: Most Important Judgements for Judiciary Exams

Download Sales of Goods Act Notes by Judiciary Gold

Conclusion

Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud's jurisprudence has been instrumental in shaping a more progressive and inclusive legal landscape in India. His landmark judgments touch upon the core of human dignity, privacy, equality, and justice, making them essential study material for judiciary exam aspirants. Key takeaways include:

• Justice Chandrachud's approach to law emphasizes adaptability, fairness, and the societal needs of the present.
• His rulings on privacy, gender equality, and other significant issues have set precedents that future legal professionals must understand and appreciate.
• Preparation for judiciary exams goes beyond memorizing laws; it's about understanding the spirit of judicial decisions and their impact on society.

Aspiring judges and legal professionals must delve into these judgments not just for exam preparation but also to grasp the essence of equitable justice in a democratic society. Justice Chandrachud's contributions serve as a beacon for all those committed to the rule of law and the betterment of society through judicious application of the legal principles.