Transformative yet unfulfilled: Senior lawyers on Chief Justice Chandrachud’s tenure

As Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud prepares to retire on Sunday, members of the Bar Council have shared insights on his tenure, recognising both his transformative contributions and areas where their expectations remained unmet.
As is often said, the Bar serves as the true measure of a judge’s legacy, making it essential to understand how senior members of the legal community view his/her time in office. India Today reached out to several prominent lawyers to capture their perspectives, as the confidence of the Bar is widely considered indispensable for any judge.
Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra highlighted CJI Chandrachud’s dedication to modernising the judiciary.
“Known for advocating digital courts and technological integration, DY Chandrachud encouraged the legal profession to embrace virtual tools even as some sought a return to pre-pandemic physical hearings,” Luthra said.
“He will be remembered as always courteous to the bar, ever smiling and for conducting his court with grace,” he added.
Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa echoed these sentiments, describing CJI Chandrachud’s tenure as “nothing short of transformative” and praising his “hands-on approach” to addressing the Bar’s needs.
According to Pahwa, the Chief Justice’s actions, such as directly calling registrars to resolve issues, demonstrated “dedication to improving court functioning and access to justice”.
Pahwa also lauded reforms introduced by Chandrachud like e-filing, virtual hearings, and digital record-keeping, which he noted have “significantly enhanced access to the justice system, particularly for those facing geographical and financial constraints”.
Furthermore, Pahwa emphasised that CJI Chandrachud’s judgments showcased “an unwavering commitment to constitutional values”, especially in expanding civil liberties and social justice. He noted that the Chief Justice’s rulings in landmark cases, such as Puttaswamy v. Union of India and Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, cemented his legacy as a “champion of individual autonomy and dignity”.
Under CJI Chandrachud’s leadership, Pahwa said, the judiciary witnessed “enhanced transparency in its registry, greater gender representation, and a record number of senior advocates designated,” all of which contributed to an inclusive vision for a responsive judiciary.
“DY Chandrachud’s retirement marks the end of an era, but his legacy — an inspiring blend of judicial innovation, reform, and unwavering commitment to constitutional ideals—will continue to inspire jurists, advocates, and citizens alike,” Pahwa added.
Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra described CJI Chandrachud as “very dignified, elegant, and erudite” in his approach, particularly with progressive discussions on privacy, homosexuality, adultery, same-sex marriage, and other emerging rights.
“In a world of social media, with a strong judiciary, the courts of law have to be the citadel of human rights and liberty and yet ensure a safe and secure balance for citizens, which is a delicate balance . At the same time, I can say very tough decisions are required to be taken by the judiciary and in particular by the chief justice of India. The future will bear testimony to the legacy he left in the next few decades,” she said.
Not all reflections on CJI Chandrachud’s tenure were unreservedly positive. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde likened him to “the Sachin Tendulkar of the legal profession” for his intellectual prowess, though he acknowledged that Chandrachud’s legacy, like any, faces scrutiny.
“He was the Sachin Tendulkar of the legal profession, but there have been questions about Tendulkar’s legacy as well,” Hegde said.
Another senior advocate, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, recognised his “intellect, patience, and sensitivity in court”, yet mentioned that Chandrachud’s attention to media perceptions drew mixed reactions. Sankaranarayanan felt, however, that criticisms were often excessive, noting, “He copped much more criticism than he deserved”.
Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose voiced some disappointment, suggesting that the Chief Justice missed opportunities to address significant issues like the Manipur violence, the Hindenburg report, the Pegasus controversy, and the Maharashtra political crisis.
“Sadly, his legacy stands buried under the weight of great expectations fuelled by his own intelligence and erudition,” Ghosh said. Despite his concerns, Ghose acknowledged the Chief Justice’s patience and courtesy.
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh added to these critiques, pointing to DY Chandrachud’s “inadequate attention to infrastructure for lawyers” and a perceived disconnect between the judiciary and the Bar.
He noted that the Supreme Court Bar Association felt excluded from key decision-making, which created “a sense of disconnect”. Singh also questioned DY Chandrachud’s decision to convert the Judges’ Library into a museum within a high-security zone, suggesting that it overlooked the needs of the Bar. Singh referenced the late Justice VR Krishna Iyer, reflecting, “True judicial leadership is rooted in impartiality, compassion, and empathy”.