The tenure of Justice DY Chandrachud in the Supreme Court of India has been distinguishably characterized by a series of landmark judgments responding to the most serious human rights problems facing the country. These include gender equality and reproductive rights, socio-economic justice, children’s rights, and persons with disabilities, in order to address several entrenched problems and develop an inclusive legal framework. This paper examines some of his landmark decisions and assesses what relevance they hold in promoting constitutional values as well as access to justice for marginalized segments.
Justice DY Chandrachud is a judge of the Supreme Court of India who has been attracting much attention with his transformational judgments in key areas of socio-economic justice, gender equality, reproductive rights, child welfare, and disability rights. His decisions, very firmly rooted in constitutional values and human rights, have had wide implications for the underprivileged communities in India. This paper discusses his landmark judgments in these areas of socio-economic justice and analyzes how his judgments have impacted progressive legal reforms.
Introduction
Justice DY Chandrachud is one of India’s most influential judges at the Supreme Court and indeed has been in the forefront of progressive judicial reforms. His judgments have not only shaped the legal landscape but have also reinforced the import of socio-economic justice, gender equality, reproductive rights, child welfare, and disability rights. The article delves into his landmark rulings so as to bring out their far-reaching impact on Indian society and their transformative influence on constitutional law.
Socio-Economic Justice
The primary legal philosophies that guide Chief Justice Chandrachud during the current course are growingly found in socio-economic justice by the Indian legal system. The erudite judge has relatively frequently opined that fundamental rights, as enshrined under the Indian Constitution, are no formal abstractions but should be interpreted towards meaningful access to justice for all. Justice Chandrachud’s judgments in his opinion acknowledged structural inequalities in society towards vulnerable groups or classes: the poor, the marginalized, and the underprivileged. The Supreme Court in one of the leading judgments guided by him reinforced that Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution does not simply mean the right to exist but embodies the right to life with dignity, encompassing food, shelter, and medical care.
One such landmark case is when he stressed the obligation of the state to expand social welfare schemes to the poorest people in society, and fulfillment of the government’s promises is specifically emphasized as the characteristic of his judgments.
His judgments embodied a wide conception of justice that could well extend beyond judicial review, providing workable avenues for socio-economic rights.
Gender Equality
Justice Chandrachud has been strongly articulating the cause of gender equality and appreciates that the reasons for women’s under participation in almost all spheres of life are rooted in patriarchal structures. His judicial philosophy certainly accounts for empowering women as interpreted from the law to protect their rights and contribute towards gender sensitivity, as he always emphasizes the need for a gender-sensitive reading of the Constitution and the law.
One of the landmark judgments in the subject is Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017), wherein the Supreme Court held the marital rape exception in Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) unconstitutional. Here, the Supreme Court, by Justice Chandrachud, impressively underlined that women, whether married or unmarried, have the right to consent to a sexual relationship. The decision was welcomed as a big step towards the destruction of the patriarchal notion that women have to meet sexual desires in marriage.
He even established the extent of his commitment to gender justice in his decision in Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh v. Union of India. In this case, the Court directed the institution of steps which would ensure equal pay for equal work for men and women as well thereby making the principle of gender equality in Indian labor law stronger.
Reproductive Rights
Justice DY Chandrachud appears to understand profoundly the very concept that women have control over their own bodies. He has spoken on issues relating to the autonomous right of women to choose for themselves issues relating to their reproductive health free from interference from the state or any power, authority or person. He has, in various judgments, underscored the need to protect the rights of women to reproduce themselves as part of their protected liberty under the Constitution.
Arguably the most significant case was the 2017 judgment of Right to Privacy by the Supreme Court under his headship, where privacy is interpreted as a right emanating under the Constitution. In fact, this judgment has had far-reaching effects in matters of reproductive rights, as it opened up avenues for the legalization of abortion, following certain conditions. Justice Chandrachud interpreted privacy as an inalienable right to entrench the argument that what constitutes women’s reproductive choices, including the abortion right, was and should remain a private matter not to be subjected to intrusive state control.
Moreover, contrary to the judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2018), Justice Chandrachud expanded the doctrine of reproductive rights as a part of one’s autonomy and liberty. His opinion has added further richness to debates in India on the legalisation of abortion and other issues in reproductive health.
Child Welfare
Justice Chandrachud has played an instrumental role in radically changing the Indian landscape for child welfare. His judgments time and again reflect a commitment towards protection of children’s rights, particularly while giving orders in the context of juvenile justice and child labor laws. He says that in all judicial decisions where a child is involved, the interest of the child needs to be considered first.
One of his notable judgments on child welfare relates to the cases concerning the Juvenile Justice Act, where he was a strong votary for a child-centric approach, focusing on rehabilitation more than on penalization. While passing his judgments, Justice Chandrachud has often pointed out that there is a need for adequate rehabilitation facilities for children who are in conflict with law and that such children should be reintegrated into society through various corrective measures. His approach to children’s justice has been based on the notion that the children be given opportunities for reforming, education, and reforming socially instead of being provided with punitive measures
Justice Chandrachud has always supported child protection against sexual offenses. He has always penalized the culprits with severe punishment in the cases of sexual abuse and also advocated for rehabilitation systems along with counseling services to help survivors.
Rights of Disabled People
Justice DY Chandrachud has been a very transformative figure for the rights of people with disabilities, especially in matters of equal access and inclusion. He has strongly urged ensuring that PWD are given equal opportunities and are facilitated by the Constitution in a manner identical to any other citizen.
Among those landmark judgments is the one interpreting the PWD Act: he opined that public and private institutions should provide accommodations for persons with disabilities to enable them to participate in society. This would mark a shift of view on disability rights from welfare, based on inequality and discrimination, to equality and non-discrimination approaches.
The judge further popularized the rights of persons with disabilities in education, employment, and accessibility. Various judgments he has made mandate that institutions must make sure their infrastructure and facilities are accessible to PWD, which is part of the greater movement for accessibility all over India. Indeed, his judgments have largely comprised the process through which India implemented the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities into its domestic law and adhered to international human rights standards.
Conclusion
Justice DY Chandrachud’s tenure in the Indian Supreme Court has been marked by a progressive approach to the law, but with a focus on human rights. His judgments on socio-economic justice, gender equality, reproductive rights, child welfare, and disability rights have not only influenced the legal discourse in India but have also contributed to the broader global conversation on human rights. His legacy as a judge will be one of deep empathy with the marginalised and firm commitment to ensuring justice for all, particularly those who have been forced into and kept there by society and the law.
The work of Justice Chandrachud has, in many ways, helped redefine the role of the judiciary in shaping a just, inclusive, and equitable society. His rulings continue to inspire reforms and frame the future course of Indian constitutional law to bring hope and concrete remedies to address burning problems of vulnerable communities in the country. His contribution will surely leave an indelible mark on the jurisprudence of India for generations to come.
References for the Article:
- Indian Constitution – Deconstructed about principles such as socio-economic justice, gender equality and personal liberty which come to fore in Justice DY Chandrachud’s judgments
- “Justice DY Chandrachud’s Judgments on Socio-Economic Justice, Gender Equality, Reproductive Rights, Child Welfare & Disability Rights” – Article by LiveLaw covering key judgments by Justice Chandrachud. Read here.
Cases Cited:
- Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017) – Marital rape and child welfare.
- Justice KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) – Defined privacy as a fundamental right.
- PWD Act judgments – Impleaded for disability rights and accessibility.
- United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) – Context for disability rights judgments
Secondary Reading:
- Articles and commentaries on Justice Chandrachud’s human rights and constitutional law approach through legal journals and platforms like Bar & Bench and The Hindu.
