Ayodhya Ram Mandir Verdict I Why Did Ex Chief Justice Chandrachud Allow Gyanvapi Survey I Barkha

In our podcast Inside Out with Barkha Dutt, former CJI Chandrachud defends the judiciary’s role as a neutral interpreter of the law, clarifying that questions in court should not be mistaken for verdicts, while stressing the importance of balance, continuity, and respect for all faiths in cases like Gyanvapi.

The conversation focused on the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which freezes the religious character of sites as of 15 August 1947, while carving out specific exemptions - notably for Ayodhya and for structures of historical or archaeological significance. Responding to criticism that his courtroom remarks on the Gyanvapi survey “opened the floodgates,” the former CJI clarified that no interim order was passed permitting conversion or carbon-dating of disputed structures. Instead, the Supreme Court ensured a balance -protecting namaz at the mosque, allowing limited Hindu worship in a separate cellar, and staying further testing until trial.

He underlined that questions raised by judges in open court are part of a necessary free-flowing dialogue, not final opinions, and that maintaining peace is the responsibility of the executive. In a multi-faith society, he said, preserving balance between communities is “crucial,” and the Court’s orders in Varanasi reflect precisely that.