Introduction: A Judge Who Brought the Constitution Closer to the People
Some judgments make headlines. Others quietly reshape how we live, speak, love, and think. Chief Justice Chandrachud, during his tenure as the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India had authored several such decisions — not just with legal precision, but with unusual clarity and empathy. His understanding of the Constitution feels both academic and deeply human.
These five decisions below are not just legal milestones. They are turning points that reflect how far Indian constitutional law has travelled — and the direction it might take next.
1. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) – Privacy Earned Its Place in the Constitution
This case was much more than a response to Aadhaar. It was about defining the space between the citizen and the State.
Before this, “privacy” was treated as vague, almost optional. But here, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India gave it shape — and more importantly, gave it strength. Chief Justice Chandrachud’s opinion didn’t just declare privacy a fundamental right. He gave it roots in dignity, autonomy, and the Constitution itself.
The part that stayed with me most was when he acknowledged that earlier rulings like ADM Jabalpur had failed us. He did not hesitate to call that a constitutional wrong. And in doing so, he restored public faith — not just in privacy, but in the judiciary’s willingness to self-correct.
Section 377 had done more than criminalise behaviour. It had labelled a whole community as unlawful. What this judgment did was not just legal—it was deeply personal for many.
Chief Justice Chandrachud’s separate opinion approached the matter not from a place of tolerance, but from recognition. He made it clear that constitutional morality must override societal morality. And more than that, he wrote that the right to love is inseparable from the right to life.
Reading that judgment felt like the Constitution was finally speaking for those it had ignored for too long. It was not just a win for the LGBTQ+ community — it was a moment of truth for Indian democracy.
3. Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018) – Adultery Law Fails the Equality Test
Section 497 IPC was problematic, not because it punished adultery, but because of how it punished it — treating women like second-class citizens.
In this judgment, Chief Justice Chandrachud didn’t just point out the gender bias. He questioned the law’s very imagination of marriage. He argued that any law which places the woman’s identity below that of her husband fails the Constitution.
In this leading judgment, CJI Chandrachud had stated that marriage does not erase one’s rights. It was a reminder that the Constitution does not go silent inside personal relationships.
What struck me was the quiet boldness of it all. He was not trying to shock. He was just being honest — and that honesty made it powerful.
4. Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024) – Darkness in Political Funding Was Not Allowed to Stay
The Electoral Bond Scheme looked clean on paper, but in reality, it hid the most important thing in a democracy — who is funding whom.
Chief Justice Chandrachud, leading the Bench, went straight to the heart of it. He said if the voter cannot trace the money, then how can she make a free and informed choice? That logic, simple as it sounds, had been ignored for too long.
This judgment brought political transparency back into focus. It told parties: if you seek public trust, you must earn it in daylight, not behind anonymous transactions.
It was one of those cases where the Constitution felt like a flashlight — not just a book.
5. Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2023) – People’s Mandate Was Given Back
Delhi’s governance had long been in a grey zone. The elected government claimed one thing, the Lieutenant Governor claimed another. This judgment ended that deadlock.
Justice Chandrachud said it simply: in a democracy, real power must rest with those chosen by the people. He clarified that barring land, police, and public order, the Delhi Government had authority over administrative services.
Honestly, this case was not only about files and formal authority. It was about something deeper — the basic respect due to the people who stood in line and voted. When a government is elected, its voice should mean something. What the Court really said here is that rules and offices should never be used to quietly silence that voice. A system that claims to be democratic must act like one — and that starts with trusting the people’s choice.
Chief Justice Chandrachud Judgments: Concluded
Chief Justice Chandrachud’s judgments show that the law is not just about procedure or precedent. It is about purpose. His work has opened constitutional doors — especially for those who were left outside them for too long.
From the right to privacy and dignity, to equal treatment under the law and cleaner politics, these five decisions show that the Constitution is not an elite document. In the right hands, it can be a deeply humane one.
Written By:
Sneha Awasthi
Supriya
Each decision reflects clarity compassion, and constitutional depth
Devansh Yadav
When I Started perusing law, he was the CJI and my favorite now I'm grateful to know more about him Thanks
Preeti
Loved it, nicely written mam