Chandrachud said that if there had been any “deal-cutting,” it would not have occurred publicly or in front of cameras. He recalled that during his two-year term as Chief Justice, exchanges of pleasantries with the PM were common—on official business and social occasions alike. One specific example he cited was asking the Prime Minister to attend the Ganpati festival, to which he said the PM responded, “I will come for sure. What’s the big deal in it?”
The visit in question took place in September 2024, when the Prime Minister participated in Ganpati puja at Chandrachud’s residence. It triggered objections from opposition politicians and some members of the legal community who argued the optics of such a public meeting could undermine confidence in the judiciary’s impartiality.
Chandrachud maintained that meetings between the executive and judiciary at the highest levels are part of democratic practice, especially for administrative or social affairs. He underlined that during such gatherings, topics pertaining to judicial decisions are not broached; judicial matters remain separate and unaffected.
He also noted instances when political leaders visited his residence or he visited theirs, both before and after taking on higher judicial roles. His past judgments, some against government policies and others in its favour, he argued, show no partiality. Chandrachud declared that judicial independence means acting without fear when upholding or questioning government actions.
Critics have countered that even social visits with political figures should be avoided to preserve public perception of institutional impartiality. Some worry that visibility and optics matter in maintaining trust, regardless of whether improper discussions take place.