A YEAR AFTER HE became chief justice of India, and a year to go before he demits office, D.Y. Chandrachud is as busy ever. He has delivered a clutch of far-reaching Constitution bench judgments (on the political crises in Delhi and Maharashtra, the voiding of Article 370, and the right of same-sex couples to marry, etc.), even as he is guiding infrastructure reforms at the Supreme Court.
Under him, the court has been digitising records, translating verdicts into regional languages, e-linking courts across the country, setting up cutting-edge facilities to hear cases online, and establishing advanced e-court centres to make services more accessible. A portal to eradicate long queues and facilitate paperless passes to Supreme Court, called SuSwagatam, is already up. To make courts more gender-sensitive, Chandrachud himself recently unveiled a 30-page leaflet called Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes Against Women.
All these changes are breeding more changes. Recently, a curious viewer who had watched court proceedings online asked Chandrachud during an event in the UK: “Can you tell me why the chairs in the Supreme Court have different heights?” Chandrachud knew that judges usually customised their old chairs as they wished, especially because back problems were an occupational hazard. But the question also had him realising the need for uniformity.
Back in India, Chandrachud directed court officials to purchase a new array of ergonomic, adjustable chairs of the same height to replace the old ones. Only the CJI’s chair was made to have a slightly taller backrest. The seating reform has Supreme Court benches now delivering judgments from chairs of uniform height.