The CJI highlighted that social visits, such as during weddings or religious festivities, are common, and only pleasantries are exchanged. “The judiciary’s independence is deeply rooted, and judicial issues are strictly kept out of such interactions,” he emphasized. He reiterated that discussions with the executive focus only on administrative topics, such as the need for better infrastructure to handle the judicial backlog, rather than on judicial matters.

Notably, CJI Chandrachud, who will retire on November 10, further stressed the professional maturity of judges and government leaders, asserting that they uphold a strict protocol that prohibits any discussion of judicial cases. “We are fully aware of our responsibilities in a democracy, just as the political executive is of theirs. Judicial independence remains sacrosanct, without the slightest compromise,” he added.

The debate was intensified by a social media post from senior advocate Indira Jaising, who argued that the visit undermined the separation of powers between the judiciary and executive. Her post stirred public discussion, with other senior lawyers and political figures joining the debate over the appearance of impartiality in the judiciary.

CJI Chandrachud responded directly to these concerns, noting that upon taking office, the CJI and other top judges meet with government heads to address judicial infrastructure needs and funding, ensuring operational efficiency without encroaching upon judicial independence.