Judicial Accountability and Transparency
The recent actions by the Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, in response to allegations involving Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court, reflect a significant move towards transparency within the judiciary.
In-House Inquiry Initiation
- The inquiry, ordered by the Chief Justice of India, involves a three-judge panel to investigate the issue of burnt currency notes found at Justice Varma's residence.
- A preliminary report from the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, Justice D.K. Upadhyaya, and a response from Justice Varma, have been reviewed.
- Justice Varma will not be allocated judicial work, and there is a proposal to transfer him back to his parent High Court, the Allahabad High Court.
Transparency Measures
- The Supreme Court posted photographs, a video clip showing burnt notes, Justice Upadhyaya's report, and Justice Varma's reply on its website.
- This action suggests that the findings of the in-house inquiry may also be made public, indicating a commitment to transparency.
Concerns and Mechanism Efficacy
- There are doubts about the efficacy of the in-house probe, especially if the incident was a conspiracy against Justice Varma.
- There is skepticism about the police's involvement due to the Supreme Court's ruling against registering FIRs against judges without consulting the CJI.
Implications for Judiciary Independence
- The independence of the judiciary should be protected not by insulating it from investigative processes, but by ensuring accountability and transparency.
- The government must avoid overstepping in this matter to prevent perceptions of influencing public demand for judicial accountability and appointment reforms.
