CJI DY Chandrachud Defends Meetings with PM Modi Amid Controversy
Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud addressed concerns regarding his recent meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the Ganesh puja at his residence in September, stating that such interactions are routine among top officials. Speaking at the Loksatta annual lecture in Mumbai on October 27, the CJI emphasized that meetings between chief justices and chief ministers are customary and vital for the functioning of the judiciary.
Importance of Judicial and Political Dialogue
CJI Chandrachud explained that these meetings serve a practical purpose, facilitating discussions on judicial infrastructure, including budget allocations for new court buildings and residences for judges. “The maturity of our political system lies in the deference shown to the judiciary, even among political leaders,” he remarked. He noted that when a chief justice is appointed, it is standard practice for them to meet with the state’s chief minister, and vice versa.
During these meetings, which he described as having a set agenda focused on state project priorities, no judicial cases are discussed. “The chief minister would never ask about a pending case. There is no bearing on judicial work,” he asserted, reinforcing the separation of judicial and political matters.
Responses to the CJI’s Comments
As CJI Chandrachud prepares for his retirement on November 10, his comments come amid a backdrop of political scrutiny. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Nalin Kohli supported the CJI’s statements, asserting that there is no violation of law when members of the judiciary meet political figures. Kohli stated, “Whatever the CJI said is absolutely right. These meetings do not reflect the judgment or views of the judiciary.”
Political Backlash
The September meeting between CJI Chandrachud and PM Modi had sparked considerable political debate, particularly from opposition leaders who voiced concerns over potential threats to judicial independence. Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut of the Shiv Sena (UBT) suggested that the CJI should recuse himself from cases related to the ongoing political tussle between rival factions of the Shiv Sena, citing the optics of the two leaders performing the aarti together.
RJD leader Manoj Jha raised concerns about the public nature of the event, particularly the presence of cameras during the puja. He expressed discomfort with the implications of such interactions, highlighting the significance of maintaining a clear boundary between the judiciary and executive.
