Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, while speaking at the India Today Mumbai Conclave 2025, reflected on his own judicial journey and addressed the sensitive issue of nepotism in the Indian judiciary. His comments came in the context of recurring allegations that the higher judiciary suffers from a dynastic bias, where family lineage often plays a role in judicial appointments. Chandrachud, whose father YV Chandrachud had also served as the Chief Justice of India, acknowledged the perception but argued that such judgments should not be reduced to mere labels. Instead, he stressed that merit and the quality of one’s work should be the ultimate criteria for evaluating a judge.
Revisiting his appointment as a high court judge in 1997, Chandrachud revealed that he had initially wanted to decline the offer due to personal challenges, including financial constraints and family issues. At that time, he was serving as the Additional Solicitor General of India and had greater financial security in that role. He recalled even requesting the then Chief Justice YK Sabharwal to relieve him of the burden of judgeship. His hesitation, as he explained, showed that the path was not simply laid out for him by virtue of his family background but was one that demanded personal sacrifice and difficult decisions.
Chandrachud also touched upon the systemic issues in judicial recruitment. He critiqued the unwritten convention that high court judges should not ordinarily be appointed before the age of 45. This practice, he argued, delays a judge’s progression to the Supreme Court, often leaving them with insufficient time to contribute meaningfully at the highest judicial level. For a young nation like India, which is benefiting from a demographic dividend, he said such outdated conventions restrict access to younger talent. Drawing a parallel to corporate structures, he questioned why age should be a barrier in the judiciary when, in other professions, leadership is increasingly entrusted to younger individuals.
On the broader issue of nepotism, Chandrachud was candid in saying that society must look beyond connections and evaluate judges by their performance and integrity. He emphasized that while lineage may open doors, it cannot sustain a career unless backed by competence and hard work. His own career path, spanning sixteen years before he became a Supreme Court judge, including thirteen years in the Bombay High Court and three years as Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, was presented as evidence of the effort and dedication required to reach the top.
Reflecting on his personal background, Chandrachud mentioned that his father, the former CJI, had explicitly forbidden him from entering a courtroom until after his retirement. This restriction led him to pursue studies at Harvard Law School, which further shaped his perspective before eventually entering the Indian judicial system. He shared this anecdote to underline that his journey was not one of privilege alone but also one of discipline, restraint, and gradual growth.
By addressing the “nepo kid” label head-on, Chandrachud sought to reframe the debate around merit and fairness in judicial appointments. His remarks highlighted the need for transparency, reform, and a more inclusive approach in recruiting judges. At the same time, he reiterated that the true measure of a judge lies not in their family background but in their body of work, their judgments, and their commitment to justice.
