More Coverage
Twitter Coverage
JOIN SATYAAGRAH SOCIAL MEDIA
"If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable": Supreme Court & High Court Litigant Association filed complaint against Justice Chandrachud accusing him of passing order benefiting his son’s client, Bar Council dismisses claims

Justice DY Chandrachud, who is next in line to become the Chief Justice of India, has been accused of benefitting his son by a complainant named Rashid Khan Pathan.
In a letter, the President of the ‘Supreme Court and High Court Litigant Association’ alleged that Justice Chandrachud passed orders in a case where his son Abhinav Chandrachud appeared as a lawyer before the Bombay High Court.
“Having perceived an adverse atmosphere and having realized that their plan to commit extortion is failed, all the accused including Adv. Abhinav Chandrachud and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud hatched a further conspiracy to exert pressure upon the other Petitioners & also upon the High Court,” Pathan claimed.
|
The case relates to an extortion case where Advocate Abhinav Chandrachud is the counsel of the accused named Sagar Suryavanshi and Sheetal Tejwani. In this case, Sagar Suryavanshi had filed an intervention petition in relation to several other similar FIRs by making her a complainant, but it was rejected by the High Court, the letter says.
The complainant in the letter says that this petition was bogus as it was based on the false claim that there is one application filed by the state for vacating the stay granted to the Petitioners and that the Bombay High Court is not hearing the said application. The complaint says that actually there is no application filed by the state and the state has not approached the Supreme Court. But despite that, the matter came up for hearing before the Supreme Court bench of Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, and he passed an order on a non-existent applicant, the letter further alleged.
The letter says, “On 29.11.2021 the matter came up for hearing before the Bench of accused Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud. Then as a part of a pre-planned conspiracy, Justice D. Y. Chandrachud without hearing the Counsel for the state and without issuing any notice to the other parties straightaway passed a blatantly illegal order regarding a non-existent application allegedly filed by the state. This was done to serve the ulterior purposes of his son and other syndicates of the mastermind extortionist accused Sagar Suryawanshi”.
According to the complaint against the Supreme Court judge, Justice Chandrachud was disqualified to hear any case where his son is representing any of the parties. While accusing the Supreme Court Judge of conflict of interest, the complainant said, “But then also he heard the matter and passed the order beneficial to his son’s client. This is an offence under sections 166, 219, 409, 120(B), 34 & 52, etc., of the Indian Penal Code.”
Pathan further alleged that the future Chief Justice violated settled principles of law while disposing of a petition, challenging restrictions on the movement of those who were not vaccinated against Covid-19. He also accused Justice Chandrachud of providing ‘wrongful profits’ to the tune of crores to vaccine companies.
Complainant Rashid Khan Pathan has also asked CJI U.U. Lalit not to recommend the name of Justice DY Chandrachud as the next chief justice of India.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Judge also has been accused of possessing a US Green card. A Twitter user named Indra Vajra made the allegation on the micro-blogging platform and asked, “Is it not a clear case of conflict of interest?”
![]() Screengrab of the tweet by Indra Varja |
Bar and Bench, in a fact-check, claimed that the allegation was false and that Justice DY Chandrachud is an Indian citizen. Recently the apex court Judge courted controversy after excerpts of his judgment in the 2018 adultery case went viral on social media.
“Justice D.Y. Chandrachud held that a married woman can make her own sexual choices. By marrying, she has not consented to refrain from sexual relations outside of marriage without the permission of her husband. A husband is not the owner of his wife’s sexuality,” a report by The Hindu from September 2018 has been doing the rounds of social media.
|
In July this year, Supreme Court Justice DY Chandrachud admonished critics of the Indian Judiciary. “I recently read a news article saying the Supreme court is delaying the hearing in the matter (of violence against Christians). Give us a break!” he said.
“One of the judges was down with covid, that’s why we couldn’t hear it. There’s a limit to how much you can target judges”, Justice Chandrachud s.
Bar Council of India issues statement
In a statement, the Bar Council of India refuted the allegations against Justice Chandrachud and condemned ‘some people with vested interests’ for supposedly interfering with the administration of Justice and the functioning of the Judiciary.
Questioning the timing of the letter, the Bar Council remarked, “It is nothing but a scurrilous and malicious attempt to interfere with the functioning of Judiciary and the administration of Justice. Such growing tendency is really a matter of serious concern for the country and it has to be checked anyhow.”
It dismissed allegations of conflict of interest and said that the orders by the Supreme Court “do not show that Justice Chandrachud knew that his son had appeared in the matter before the High Court.
“This long letter is nothing, but a device to gain cheap popularity. This man has also defamed the litigants-mass of our country. This is also very sad. Such persons deserve strong penal and disciplinary action”, the Bar Council of India said.
While recommending disciplinary action against Rashid Khan Pathan, it said, “The country and the Indian Bar has complete faith in Dr. Justice D. Y. Chandrachud. Hon’ble Dr Justice D. Y. Chandrachud is an asset for the world’s Judiciary and is known for his knowledge, honesty and integrity.”
The Council also appealed to Justice Chandrachud to ignore the letter and said that Judges are not under compulsion to defend their verdicts against ‘scandalous and baseless attacks’ from anti-institutional people.
References:
Support Us
Satyagraha was born from the heart of our land, with an undying aim to unveil the true essence of Bharat. It seeks to illuminate the hidden tales of our valiant freedom fighters and the rich chronicles that haven't yet sung their complete melody in the mainstream.
While platforms like NDTV and 'The Wire' effortlessly garner funds under the banner of safeguarding democracy, we at Satyagraha walk a different path. Our strength and resonance come from you. In this journey to weave a stronger Bharat, every little contribution amplifies our voice. Let's come together, contribute as you can, and champion the true spirit of our nation.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| ICICI Bank of Satyaagrah | Razorpay Bank of Satyaagrah | PayPal Bank of Satyaagrah - For International Payments |
If all above doesn't work, then try the LINK below:
Please share the article on other platforms
DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text. The website also frequently uses non-commercial images for representational purposes only in line with the article. We are not responsible for the authenticity of such images. If some images have a copyright issue, we request the person/entity to contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and we will take the necessary actions to resolve the issue.
Related Articles
- "Waqf Act is against secularism, unity, and integrity of the nation; Waqf is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution" says Ashwini Upadhyay: Filed PIL in Delhi HC challenging provisions of Waqf Act
- Fifty-six former Supreme and High Court judges denounce the INDIA bloc’s impeachment notice against Justice G.R. Swaminathan, warning that political pressure threatens judicial independence in India
- "Chutiyaram": Delhi’s Trade Marks Registry shockingly approved ‘CHUTIYARAM’ for Sadhna Goswami’s namkeen and biscuits, but later on withdrawing it after two weeks, admitting Balaji’s epic fail let a crude mark dodge Section 9(2)(c), sparking a hearing
- ‘Do we roll out a red carpet?’ Supreme Court led by CJI Surya Kant issues a sharp warning as it questions illegal Rohingya migrants entering India and a rising crisis over missing refugees nationwide.
- "जालसाज़": MP High Court punished a journalist with a Rs 25,000 fine for misusing PIL to target a temple on Yashwant Niwas Road, Indore, citing vested interest, lack of evidence, and selective intent instead of genuine public concern, dismissing his plea
- Due to high public interest, the Law Commission has extended the Uniform Civil Code feedback deadline by two weeks, meanwhile, AIUDF leader Badruddin Ajmal misinterpreted the UCC, linking it to uniform attire and diet commenting 'sarees-for-all'
- "Judge saheb ko bura laga kya… nahi, bas yunhi pooch riya hun": CJI Ramana slams Indian media amid the backlash judiciary is facing over controversial remarks and judgements, says ‘Media running agenda-driven debates and kangaroo courts’
- 'Every sinner has a future': Bombay HC suspends Nijam Asgar Hashmi's life sentence, convicted for beheading Umesh Ingale, his girlfriend’s cousin; questions evidence led by Hashmi, who invited Ingale for "sheer khurma" on Eid just to get rid of him
- "अब आयो ऊंट पहाड़ नीचे": A Bareilly court convicts Mohammed Alim for Love Jihad, tricking a woman into conversion and abortion, giving him life in prison, penalizing his father, and warning of conversion threats like in Pakistan and Bangladesh
- "Mediocre minds usually dismiss anything which reaches beyond their own understanding": Allahabad HC dismisses PIL seeking Judicial Probe into death of 63 children at Gorakhpur Hospital in 2017, UP Govt had terminated services of Dr. Kafeel Ahmad Khan
- "Abuse is the weapon of the vulgar": Supreme Court to hear PIL for constitution of National Commission for Men, in total of 1,18,979 men suicide in the given year accounted 72% of the total suicide cases whereas women suicide represented roughly 27% only
- ‘Lord Krishna was the first mediator’: SC slams UP’s ₹500cr temple takeover bid, halts fund use, questions secret court order, and proposes retired judge panel to oversee Banke Bihari Temple while preserving goswami traditions amid ordinance challenge
- "There is difference between blasphemy and expressing religious opinions based on one’s knowledge of the subject": Historic decision by Madras High Court from 2019
- Milords, why demand to stand above criticism when democracy thrives on questioning, for Justice B Sudershan Reddy’s Salwa Judum verdict shows even judges must face accountability, no matter how powerful their robes once were
- "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on": Google moves Supreme Court against National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order upholding CCI's ₹1,337 crore penalty for abuse of dominant position within the Android ecosystem


























