Row erupts over PM Modi visiting CJI’s home for Ganesh Puja

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud’s home to attend a Ganesh Puja has triggered a political controversy and sparked divisions within the legal community.

While some leaders from the Opposition and lawyers on Thursday questioned the propriety of such a meeting, especially given the ongoing cases involving the government, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and a section of legal voices dismissed the criticism as unwarranted, terming the event a private affair.

The controversy escalated after Opposition leaders, particularly from the Shiv Sena (UBT), raised concerns about the implications of the meeting on the judiciary’s independence. Member of Parliament Sanjay Raut expressed fears that the meeting might affect the ongoing Maharashtra case being heard by CJI Chandrachud. “Our case of Maharashtra... the hearing is going on before CJI Chandrachud, so we have doubts if we will get justice because the PM is the other party in the case,” Raut remarked.

Similarly, another Shiv Sena (UBT) MP, Priyanka Chaturvedi, took a jibe at the timing of the visit. She posted on social media, questioning whether the CJI would now prioritise the pending Maharashtra case, hinting that elections were around the corner in the state and alleging a delay in justice.

RJD leader Manoj Jha echoed these sentiments, arguing that institutional independence is paramount and must not only exist in principle but be seen in practice.

Responding to the uproar, BJP leaders condemned the Opposition’s criticism.

Union Minister Piyush Goyal accused the opposition of indulging in “appeasement politics” and attempting to malign both PM Modi and CJI Chandrachud. He contended that the event was nothing more than a religious celebration, and questioning it revealed a bias against Hindu rituals.

BJP IT cell chief Amit Malviya further said that such interactions between heads of state and judiciary are not new, recalling the presence of former CJI KG Balakrishnan at Iftar parties hosted by former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Malviya argued that the same critics who lauded secularism during those events were now unjustly targeting a religious ceremony.

HT reached out to former CJI Balakrishnan, who refrained from commenting on the specific episode but defended the practice of constitutional heads attending social and religious events together. Responding to a specific query about his presence at an Iftar party hosted in 2009 by the then PM Manmohan Singh, the former CJI said, “There is no problem in attending such Iftar parties.”

The legal fraternity, however, remained split on the implications of the PM’s visit to the CJI’s residence. Senior advocate Indira Jaising criticised the meeting, accusing the CJI of compromising judicial independence and blurring the lines between the executive and judiciary. Similarly, lawyer Prashant Bhushan pointed to the Judicial Code of Conduct, which advises judges to remain aloof, arguing that the CJI’s participation in a public religious event with the Prime Minister was a clear violation of this code.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is also the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, found fault not with the CJI but with PM Modi’s decision to publicise the meeting. Describing CJI Chandrachud as “a man of great personal integrity”, Sibal expressed concern over the release of the video, which he felt stirred unnecessary speculation. The Rajya Sabha MP added: “There is going to be an election in Maharashtra. In that context, it was not the opportune time for the PM to have made a spectacle out of a private ceremony. My view is it was best that it should have been avoided.”

On the other hand, several legal voices defended the CJI’s actions, arguing that such social interactions should not be viewed with suspicion. Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra remarked that a mere meeting between the PM and CJI at a social occasion should not be the basis to test judicial independence or the conduct of propriety. He added that meetings between heads of different constitutional branches are routine and should not be grounds for questioning judicial independence.

Former Supreme Court judge Ajay Rastogi, echoing Luthra’s sentiments, downplayed the controversy, noting that both the PM and the CJI regularly interact in various public forums.

“What suspicion can be drawn if CJI visits PM or PM visits CJI just to have puja at somebody’s residence?” Rastogi asked, adding that judicial integrity is not compromised by such interactions. He added: “After a judge who has remained in office for over 20 years, it is difficult to imagine that he will be influenced with one meeting.”