It’s concerning to note the apparent contradiction between Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud’s recent remarks saying The Chief Justice urges lawyers to prioritize court and Constitution over ‘Political Beliefs’ and the outcomes of certain verdicts. While advocating for lawyers to prioritize the court and the Indian Constitution over political inclinations, it’s essential to scrutinize whether these principles are consistently applied in judicial decisions.

In the recent verdict where the Supreme Court stayed the order striking down the Uttar Pradesh madrasa law, citing misinterpretation by the Allahabad High Court, questions arise regarding religious equality in India’s legal framework. The perception that CJI Chandrachud consistently favors Muslims over Hindus in such cases exacerbates concerns regarding impartiality and fairness.

The issue at hand highlights a glaring discrepancy in religious freedoms, where the Hindu community seemingly faces restrictions on running religious studies while similar privileges are extended to Muslims. Such disparities not only undermine the principle of religious equality enshrined in India’s Constitution but also raise doubts about the judiciary’s commitment to upholding these principles.

In striving for a truly secular and equitable society, it is imperative for the judiciary, including the Chief Justice of India, to ensure that legal decisions uphold the principles of fairness, impartiality, and religious equality for all citizens, irrespective of their faith. Any perception of bias or favoritism erodes public trust in the judiciary and undermines the foundation of democracy and rule of law.