The left-liberal coterie takes delight in manufacturing controversies where none exists. This time the liberals are suffering a massive meltdown over Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the residence of CJI DY Chandrachud for Ganesh Puja on the 11th of September. As the visuals of PM Modi performing Ganpati aarti at CJI’s residence surfaced on social media, several left-liberals claimed that the independence of the judiciary has been compromised, and the principles of separation of power have been risked. Basically, they are using a personal visit and a sweet gesture by PM Modi to further their imaginary ‘democracy in danger’ narrative.
Joined Ganesh Puja at the residence of CJI, Justice DY Chandrachud Ji.
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) September 11, 2024
May Bhagwan Shri Ganesh bless us all with happiness, prosperity and wonderful health. pic.twitter.com/dfWlR7elky
In this vein, senior Supreme Court lawyer Indira Jaising expressed her discontent over PM Modi’s visit to CJI Chandrachud’s residence and said: “Chief Justice of India has compromised the separation of powers between the Executive and Judiciary. Lost all confidence in the independence of the CJI. The SCBA must condemn this publicly displayed compromise of Independence of the CJI from the Executive @KapilSibal.”
Taking to X, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Manoj Kumar Jha said: “That is the state of the republic….ladies and gentlemen. Jai Hind.”
That is the state of the republic….ladies and gentlemen.
— Manoj Kumar Jha (@manojkjhadu) September 11, 2024
Jai Hind https://t.co/dH9XjQv4co
‘Historian’ Irfan Habib accused CJI and the Indian judiciary of being in the ‘service’ of the Modi government and said: “Judiciary in the service mode.”
Insinuating that PM Modi’s personal visit to the CJI’s Ganpati puja undermines ‘secularism’ lawyer Sanjay Hegde said: “Separation of church & state?”
Meanwhile, folk singer Neha Singh Rathore claimed that “the bell of danger for democracy is ringing at CJI’s house.”
Similarly, ‘Tribal Army’ asserted that somehow PM Modi doing Ganpati puja at CJI Chandrachud’s residence on a personal visit raises ‘concerns’ over secularism and judicial impartiality. “Chief Justice of India Dy Chandrachud’s participation in Ganpati Puja with PM Modi raises serious questions on secularism and judicial impartiality. Participating in religious events with prominent political persons in power undermines the independence and credibility of the judiciary,” the X user posted.
Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Priyanka Chaturvedi directly raised questions over the impartiality of CJI Chandrachud and said: “Okay. After the festivities are over hopefully CJI will deem fit and be slightly freer to conclude the hearing on Maharashtra and the blatant disregard of Article 10 of the Constitution in Maharashtra. Oh wait, elections round the corner anyway, it can be adjourned for another day,” Chaturvedi posted.
Meanwhile, ‘journalist’ Saba Naqvi said: “People say the CJI is a great legal mind. He obviously has original views on separation of State & Church. All I can think about is the spectacle of two of our nation’s most powerful men, while Manipur burns. Waiting for the enlightened to take suo moto notice of the rapes, killings and civil war.”
People say the CJI is a great legal mind. He obviously has original views on separation of State & Church. All I can think about is the spectacle of two of our nation's most powerful men, while Manipur burns. Waiting for the enlightened to take suo moto notice of the rapes,… https://t.co/LquwlCGfuC
— Saba Naqvi (@_sabanaqvi) September 11, 2024
Suffering another “zakham”, TheWire ‘journalist’ Arfa Khanum Sherwani said: “Justice will stand in support of the oppressors If this is the situation then who will go to the court.”
The left-liberal ecosystem’s outrage over Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the CJI for Ganesh Puja and darshan, alleging a perceived infraction of the separation of powers and a compromise of judicial independence, is completely absurd, Hinduphobic, and hypocritical.
PM hosting Iftar parties with taxpayer’s money was all great and lovely
Under the UPA government, Iftar Parties were all the rage. They were organised at the Rashtrapati Bhavan and PM’s residence too. This party was attended by several notable dignitaries, including the then CJI of India. However, no raked up ‘democracy in danger’, ‘separation of state and church [read religion]’ argument then? The question arises, had the left-liberal ecosystem outraged in a similar fashion as they are doing over Ganpati Puja if CJI Chandrachud happened to a Muslim and invited the PM to his Iftar party?
Even though PM Modi’s visit to CJI Chandrachud’s Ganesh Puja was personal and not official, the left liberals have slipped into ‘democracy khatre mein hai’ mode, however, there was no such meltdown in 2009, when the then Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh hosted Iftar party at his residence which was attended by the then CJI K.G. Balakrishnan. Perhaps, for the left liberals, Ganesh Puja implies the ringing of the bell of ‘danger’ to democracy while the Iftar party implies ‘cementing secularism’.
Is the democracy, separation of powers of judiciary and executive, and judicial independence really compromised by PM Modi’s personal visit to CJI’s religious celebration?
India, a Hindu-majority country, is a land of various festivals that bring people together. Cultural and religious traditions are inextricable in all aspects of Indian society, including politics, the judiciary, and public service. A social or religious visit, such as the Ganesh Puja, is not uncommon. PM Modi’s visit to the CJI’s residence for a religious event resonates with India’s cultural fabric, in which personal relationships and social norms do not always influence the professional autonomy of individuals in high positions. Many leaders, regardless of party affiliation, participate in similar social and religious gatherings that are viewed as part of Indian customs rather than a violation of professional or constitutional restrictions.
The Legislative, the executive and the judiciary are the three pillars of democracy, it is only when they work in tandem that our democracy remains strong. While the judiciary has a crucial independent and unbiased role to play, it should not be assumed that the CJI, the Supreme Court or High Court judges are supposed to hate parliamentarians and the Prime Minister regardless of which party is in power. It is a juvenile contention that somehow CJI inviting PM Modi to his residence for a small celebration of a festival compromises his judicial impartiality.
There have been several instances when judges expressed their biased opinions and yet the same left-liberal ecosystem did not question their impartiality or their secular credentials. In February this year, former Justice Joseph Kurian asked CJI Chandrachud to drop the Supreme Court’s motto “Yato Dharmastato Jaya” (Where there is Dharma, there is Victory), taken from the Hindu epic Mahabharat. Speaking at an event organised by left-liberals and the controversial portal TheWire, former Justice Joseph suggested that the Supreme Court’s motto diverges from the national motto and, by implication, the national ethos. Back in 2018, Joseph equated the Catholic Church to the Preamble of India but no one cried ‘secularism khatre mein hai’.
Notably, Article 25 of the Indian constitution guarantees all citizens including the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of India, the freedom of conscience and the right to freely to profess, practise and propagate religion. Thus, the Prime Minister, CJI and others, including opposition leaders, are allowed to meet each other and greet each other in social interaction.
“(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion. (2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law—(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which maybe associated with religious practice; (b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus,” Article 25 of the constitution states.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan accused CJI Chandrachud of violating the code of conduct and said: “Code of Conduct for Judges: “A Judge Should practice a degree of aloofness consistent with the dignity of his office. There should be no act or omission by him which is unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in which that office is held” Violation of Code”.
Code of Conduct for Judges:
— Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) September 12, 2024
“A Judge Should practice a degree of aloofness consistent with the dignity of his office.
There should be no act or omission by him which is unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in which that office is held”
Violation of Code pic.twitter.com/kNjuMosbgZ
Clearly, in the opinion of Bhushan, the CJI being a practising Hindu doing Ganesh Puja at his residence is an “act unbecoming of the high office”. Bhushan, however, forgot that even CJI has the right to practice his religion in his personal life and is free to invite anyone to the celebration of any festival at his residence in a personal capacity.
This assertion that a single personal visit by PM Modi to the CJI’s residence may jeopardise judicial independence overgeneralises the power and structure of India’s judiciary. The Supreme Court of India follows well-defined procedures, with judgements based on collective decision-making by several judges rather than the influence of particular politicians, including the Prime Minister. The idea that a personal meeting or a social or religious visit might compromise judicial impartiality is both imaginative and devoid of any evidence. Gone are the days when Justice P. N. Bhagwati eulogised Indira Gandhi in 1980 over her electoral triumph in a congratulatory letter.
Historically, noted personalities, including the PM and other politicians as seen in the case of PM Singh inviting CJI Balakrishnan, have had social interactions with members of the judiciary without undermining the principle of judicial independence. The system has established checks and balances in place to prevent any external entity, especially the prime minister, from exerting excessive power over the judiciary. In fact, the judiciary enjoys independence to such an extent that sometimes even judicial overreach goes unnoticed or at times is celebrated by the same liberal gang.
In our country, the principle of separation of powers ensures that the three branches of government—executive, legislative, and judicial—function independently, but it does not preclude social or cultural contact between them. PM Modi’s visit to the CJI’s residence for a religious occasion does not imply influencing court judgements or undermining judicial autonomy.
Thus, the liberal meltdown is simply a flawed interpretation of the separation of powers. This principle is meant to prevent interference in carrying out constitutional duties, rather than to eradicate all types of social or personal interaction and harbour scorn for each other. Evidently, the liberal outcry over PM Modi visiting CJI Chandrachud’s residence poses no significant threat to the judiciary’s independent functioning, and the outrage stems from ideological opposition and juvenile hatred rather than genuine concerns.
