Politics · India · 4 hrs ago
Chandrachud says collegium decisions were unanimous amid Kaul memoir claims
Former Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud says Supreme Court collegium decisions were unanimous and that Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul endorsed every recommendation.
The collegium is the group of senior judges that recommends candidates for appointment as judges in India.
Chandrachud was responding to Kaul’s forthcoming memoir, which says he was too deferential to the government during appointment discussions.
Kaul also describes the government questioning the representation of a minority faith and the caste background of a candidate’s family.
Chandrachud says Kaul never formally dissented or walked out of a collegium meeting, and that judges discussed candidates before sending recommendations to the government.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh cited Kaul’s account to raise concerns about judicial independence under the Modi government.
Chandrachud says he has not read the memoir and cannot give a detailed response until he has; the memoir is forthcoming.
Former Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud says collegium decisions were unanimous and former Supreme Court judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul endorsed every recommendation.
Chandrachud says he has not read Kaul’s forthcoming memoir and cannot respond to its account in detail.
Kaul’s memoir describes Chandrachud as “too deferential to the government” over judicial appointments.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh says the memoir raises serious questions about judicial independence under the Modi government.
Kaul has also described government questions about a candidate’s minority faith and family caste during an appointment process.
- Who
- Former CJI Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud responded to former Supreme Court judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul’s account. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh also commented.
- What
- Chandrachud said collegium decisions were unanimous and Kaul endorsed every recommendation. Kaul’s forthcoming memoir alleges excessive deference to the government over appointments.
- When
- October 25, 2026.
- Where
- India; the statements concern the Supreme Court and its collegium.
- Why
- Chandrachud responded to Kaul’s account of their interactions over judicial appointments. Ramesh cited the memoir to question judicial independence.
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
Collegium decisions
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud
Chandrachud said the decisions were unanimous and Kaul endorsed every recommendation.
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
Kaul’s memoir describes Chandrachud as “too deferential to the government” over appointments.
Government involvement
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud
Chandrachud said official records showed recommendations and their reasons were made public, and that judges held multiple discussions before recommendations were sent.
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
Kaul objected to discussions with the executive before formal deliberation and described government questions about a candidate’s faith and family caste.
Kaul was elevated to the Supreme Court.
Kaul retired as a Supreme Court judge.
Ramesh cited Kaul’s forthcoming memoir to raise concerns about judicial independence.
Chandrachud responded, saying collegium decisions were unanimous and Kaul had endorsed every recommendation.
- Respondent
- Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, former Chief Justice of India
- Memoir author
- Sanjay Kishan Kaul, former Supreme Court judge
- Memoir title
- Without Fear or Favour
- Collegium claim
- Chandrachud said decisions were unanimous and Kaul endorsed every recommendation
- Kaul’s retirement
- December 2023
- Ramesh’s role
- Congress general secretary in charge of communications
3 sources
What people are saying
Unless I read his observations and understand the context in which they were made, I would not be in a position to offer a detailed response
Judges held multiple rounds of informal and formal discussions before names were officially considered and recommendations sent to the government
A book by former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul has raised serious questions regarding the independence of the judiciary during the tenure of the Modi government.
too deferential to the government