Constitution doesn’t require one to be atheist to be a judge: Ex-CJI Chandrachud defends praying before Ayodhya verdict

Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud has clarified his comments about praying before the landmark Ayodhya verdict, asserting that the Constitution does not demand judges to be atheists in order to be impartial. Chandrachud, who was part of the five-judge bench that ruled on the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, addressed the issue in an interview with BBC's HARDtalk.

I am a man of faith: Chandrachud

When asked about his prayer before the verdict, Chandrachud responded, “If you look at social media and try and derive what was said by a judge, you will get the wrong answer. I make no bones of the fact that I am a man of faith, our Constitution does not require you to be an atheist to be an independent judge, and I value my faith, what my faith teaches me is the universality of religion and irrespective of who comes to my court, and that applies to all other judges in Supreme Court, you dispense equal and even-handed justice.”



Chandrachud had previously mentioned in October 2024 that, ahead of delivering the Ayodhya verdict, he prayed to God for a resolution. “Very often, we have cases (to adjudicate) but don’t arrive at a solution. Something similar happened during the Ayodhya (Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute), which was in front of me for three months. I sat before the deity and told him he needs to find a solution," he had stated. "Believe me, if you have faith, God will always find a way."

Ayodhya Verdict

The Ayodhya verdict, issued on November 9, 2019, cleared the way for the construction of the Ram temple and allocated five acres of land for the building of a mosque. Chandrachud was part of the bench that delivered this landmark decision.

Time in Meditation and Prayar important for me: Chandrachud

In his conversation with BBC’s Stephen Sackur, Chandrachud further explained that judges often operate in areas of conflict and each judge has a unique approach to maintaining calm and neutrality. "For me, time in meditation and prayer is very important, but my time in meditation and prayer teaches me to be even-handed to every religious group and community in the country," he added.

The interview also touched on some of the significant cases handled by Chandrachud during his tenure. One such case was the Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss a petition challenging the abrogation of Article 370, which had granted Jammu and Kashmir special status. Chandrachud defended the verdict, stating that Article 370 was a "transitional" provision within the Constitution. He questioned, "Is 75 plus years too less for abrogating a transitional provision?"