Farewell speech by Chief Justice D. Y Chandrachud. 
Chief justice D. Y. Chandrachud has played a pivotal role in shaping the legal landscape through his involvement in landmark cases. His contributions include judgments on the electoral bond scheme, the contentious Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, landmark privacy rights, decriminalization of homosexuality, and the Sabarimala temple entry case. He has also addressed crucial issues like the status of Jammu and Kashmir and deliberations on same-sex marriage.
Introduction
D. Y . Chandrachud was born on 11 November 1959. His father Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud, is the longest serving chief justice of India and his mother, Prabha, was a classical musician who sang for All India Radio. , he has enriched academic circles, having lectured at prominent institutions worldwide, including the University of Mumbai, the University of Oklahoma, Harvard, Yale, and several other esteemed universities. His insights have bridged academia and the judiciary, inspiring students and professionals across the globe.
He studied at John Connon School in Mumbai and then at St. Columba’s School in Delhi. In 1979, he graduated with honors in economics and mathematics from St. Stephen’s College, University of Delhi. He then pursued his law degree from Delhi University in 1982, he then went abroad to complete his Master’s degree in law from Harvard Law School in 1983, where he was awarded the Inlaks Scholarship for Indian students and the Joseph H. Beale Prize. In 1986, he completed a Doctor of Juridical Science at Harvard, research on affirmative action, examining how different countries approach the subject in their laws.
Some of his judgments
Essential attribute of privacy. Discrimination against an individual on the basis of sexual orientation is deeply offensive to the dignity and self-worth of the individual.The above observations played a role in the judgment of the Supreme Court declaring Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code unconstitutional.He is also known for expressly overruling the ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla habeas corpus, case in which the lead opinion was written by his father, the former chief justice of India Y. V. Chandrachud.
In his judgments, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud has emphasized the importance of dissent as an essential component of democracy, describing it as “the safety valve” that preserves democratic vitality. His rulings have frequently supported the right to free speech, particularly when this fundamental freedom is threatened by state actions. A notable example is his decision in Indibility Creative Pvt Ltd v State of West Bengal, where he ruled in favor of the screening of Bhobishyot Bhoot, a political satire that had been banned by the state through means beyond constitutional bounds.
Chandrachud’s interim order asserted that the film’s screening should proceed without interference, later reaffirming in his final judgment that if there were any concerns of public unrest, the State’s responsibility was to provide police protection rather than prevent the film’s release. His decision underscored a crucial principle: the State has an affirmative duty not only to avoid restricting free speech but to actively protect it. Justice Chandrachud argued that free speech rights extend beyond mere ‘negative’ protections, which limit government intrusion. They also require a ‘positive’ mandate on the State to foster an environment where these freedoms can genuinely thrive.
While being in his tenure as chief justice of India, The supreme court had taken the suo moto congnisance in R G KAR MEDICAL hospital rape and murder case. The nation appreciated the move because the rage was big, and people’ were losing faith in the law.
As he eloquently noted, “Free speech cannot be gagged for fear of the mob.” Political freedoms, he argued, place both limits on the State’s power and obligations to protect individuals from entities that might try to undermine these rights. When organized groups pose a threat to freedom of expression, the State must not remain passive; it is bound to act and protect these rights. The instruments of state power, he concluded, should serve to uphold and enable the free exercise of speech and expression, securing the conditions necessary for democratic freedoms to flourish.
Speech by Chief Justice D.Y Chandrachud
If anyone in the court, I would like you to just please forgive me.
When you expose your own life to public knowledge, you expose yourself to criticism, particularly in today’s age of social media. So be it. My shoulders are broad enough to accept all the criticism that we have faced.
You realize that you cannot cure all injustice which comes into your plate everyday as a judge. Some injustices are within the realm of the rule of law. Other injustices are beyond what the Courts can do.
I won’t be able to deliver justice from tomorrow onwards, but I am content.
