Former CJI Chandrachud opens up on Ayodhya Verdict, Modi meeting, in Lallantop interview
Speaks about delay in bail to Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam
New Delhi: Former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud has spoken at length on several contentious issues, from the Ayodhya title suit and mediation process to his meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi during Ganesh Utsav, the debate on bail in sensitive cases, and the challenges facing the judiciary. The remarks came during an interview with The Lallantop, excerpts of which have been shared ahead of the full video release.
The discussion touched on his judicial journey, his role in landmark verdicts, and his response to criticisms by fellow judges and political observers.
On the Ayodhya Verdict
Justice Chandrachud, who was part of the five-judge bench that delivered the 2019 Ayodhya land dispute judgment, addressed recent comments made by Odisha High Court Chief Justice S. Muralidhar. Justice Muralidhar had questioned why the decision was delivered in the name of “authorless judgment” and suggested that the ruling was rushed before then-CJI Ranjan Gogoi’s retirement.
Chandrachud countered this sharply. “Many judges become social reformers after retirement. Perhaps they want to be seen as such. But I do not agree with what he said. To say that this was an authorless judgment is wrong. This case was not an ordinary one. For over 100 years, society had witnessed tension before independence, during British rule, and after independence. The bench decided that whatever the verdict, it must be spoken in one voice. That is why it was delivered without attribution,” he explained.
He dismissed suggestions that the case was hurried to accommodate CJI Gogoi’s retirement. “Is this a joke? Mediation was given full opportunity. There were mediators like Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, former judge F.M.I. Kalifulla, and senior advocate Sriram Panchu. Their report made it clear no settlement acceptable to all sides had been reached. Should we have let 15–20 years pass in mediation? People would laugh at the Supreme Court,” he said.
On Criticism of Social Media Interpretations
Chandrachud also pointed out that Justice Muralidhar may have relied on incomplete information. “If he had seen the video clip, he would have realised that reading social media and giving opinions can be misleading. The truth is that mediation did not succeed, and the verdict had to come.”
On Ganesh Utsav Meeting with PM Modi
The CJI addressed criticism after photographs and videos emerged in September 2024 of Prime Minister Narendra Modi attending Ganesh Chaturthi celebrations at his official residence. The images had raised questions about the separation of the judiciary and executive.
“Yes, the Prime Minister came to my house. I have been CJI for two years. I often went to his office, his house, as part of official work—whether for selecting the CBI Director or Lokpal. After such meetings, he would often say, sit for five minutes, have tea, let us talk about digitisation or reforms. I have also invited him for official functions,” Chandrachud clarified.
He added that the Ganesh Utsav invitation was extended by him before retirement. “We were sitting together at an event, and I asked him will you come for Ganpati? He said yes. This was an exchange between constitutional authorities, not something that affects judicial work.”
On Bail and the Umar Khalid Case
Questions about prolonged custody of Delhi riots accused Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam also came up. Critics had raised concerns about why bail was denied despite the judiciary’s repeated emphasis that “bail is the rule, jail the exception.”
Chandrachud explained that Khalid’s lawyers themselves had withdrawn bail pleas on several occasions. He also addressed allegations that cases were selectively assigned to certain judges, including Justice Bela Trivedi, who had once been associated as counsel for Narendra Modi.
He rejected such claims. “In the Supreme Court, there are clear rules and conventions on allocation. Cases travel with judges after retirements or health reasons. For example, Justice Bopanna had to step back after heart surgery, and cases had to be reassigned. To say that cases are specifically allotted is wrong. If we start giving lawyers or political establishments the power to pick their judges, the entire system will collapse,” he said.
On the Sabarimala Verdict and Social Backlash
Reflecting on another landmark case, Chandrachud spoke about the Sabarimala judgment allowing women of menstruating age to enter the temple. “It was not an easy verdict. People troll us because they believe faith has been affected. But I am a judge, not God. I believe what I did was right. If society has another view, even harshly against us, let them speak. That is their right,” he said.
On Leaked Supreme Court Video
He also expressed concern about a controversial video clip that was uploaded on the Supreme Court’s website. “The in-house committee was supposed to decide whether the video was genuine or doctored. By uploading it directly on the website, the impression went out to the public that it must be genuine because it was on the Supreme Court’s site. Ordinary citizens do not know whether a video is real or doctored. That was a mistake,” he admitted.
On the Larger Judicial System
Chandrachud repeatedly stressed that criticisms must be seen in the broader context of protecting institutional integrity. “The danger lies in allowing individuals or parties to dictate before whom their cases should be heard. Today it is a matter of personal liberty, tomorrow it could be a matter of industrial disputes. If that line is crossed, the system itself is at risk,” he warned.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Ex-PM Devegowda warns opposition of electoral losses if they continue to allege 'vote chori'
New Delhi (PTI): Former Prime Minister H D Devegowda on Monday said the Opposition parties would "suffer" if they continue to raise allegations of "vote chori" and create suspicion in the minds of voters by blaming Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government.
Participating in a discussion on election reforms in the Rajya Sabha, he criticised the Opposition for making a mockery about the Prime Minister "in the streets and on the public platform".
"This (India) is a very big country. A large country. Congress may be in three states. Remember my friends please, by using the words 'vote chori' you are going to suffer in the coming days. You are not going to win the battle," Devegowda said, referring to the Opposition members.
He asked what the Opposition is going to earn by "blaming Narendra Modi's leadership and creating a suspicion in the mind of the voters" through the claims of "vote chori".
"What has happened to their minds? Let them rectify," Devegowda said.
ALSO READ: Search operation ends in Anjaw truck accident, 20 bodies recovered
The former prime minister said that during his over seven decades of public life, he has never raised such issues of vote theft despite facing defeat in elections.
He also cited a letter written by the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru regarding inclusion of "18,000 votes" (voters) in Kerala.
"Why I am telling this (because) during the Nehru period also, there were certain lapses in the electoral system," said Devegowda, who was the prime minister between June 1, 1996 and April 21, 1997.
He said that the Congress party faced defeat in the recent Bihar elections despite raising the issues of mistakes in the electoral rolls.
"What happened after that even after so much review (of voters list). Think (for) yourself! You got six MLAs," the senior Janata Dal (Secular) leader said.
Devegowda questioned the Opposition as to why they want to make allegations against the prime minister on the issue of the voters list?
"Election Commission is there. Supreme Court is there. The Election Commission has given direction to all the state units to rectify all these things," he said.
Devegowda said people of the country have full confidence in Narendra Modi's government and it will come back to power after the next Lok Sabha elections as well.
K R Suresh Reddy, Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) party's Rajya Sabha member from Telangana, said that electoral reforms are the backbone for a healthy democracy.
He said a large and diverse nation like Indi needs clean electoral rolls.
Asserting that strict re-verification should not become a mechanism for exclusion, Reddy said no eligible voter should lose their right to vote simply because accessing paperwork is difficult.
He said while the concern definitely is on the voters' exclusion, "we should also be equally concerned about the percentage of voting."
"What is happening in voting today? Once the election ends, the drama begins. The biggest challenge that the Indian democracy has been facing in spite of two major Constitutional amendments has been the anti-defection. Anti-defection is the name of the game today, especially in smaller states, especially where the legislatures are small in number," Reddy said.
The senior BRS leader suggested creation of a parliamentary committee "which would constantly look into the defection" and "ways and means to cutting that".
AIADMK's M Thambidurai raised the issues related to election campaigning.
ALSO READ: National Herald case: Shivakumar to seek time next week to appear before Delhi police
"Election campaigns are one of the important election processes. In that, political parties must be given the proper chance to campaign," he said and cited problems faced by his party in Tamil Nadu in this regard.
Thambidurai said political parties were facing hardships in Tamil Nadu to conduct public meetings and to express their views to the public.
YSRCP's Yerram Venkata Subba Reddy stressed on bringing electoral reforms at both the state and national levels.
He also suggested replacing Electronic Voting Machines with paper ballots in all future elections.
"EVM may be efficient but can't be trusted. Paper ballot may not be efficient but can be trusted. You need trust in democracy," Reddy added.
