By Inderjit Badhwar
There are moments in the life of a democracy when uncomfortable truths must be confronted, no matter how deeply embedded they are in our national consciousness or institutions. This is one such moment.
The Indian judiciary, long considered the last bastion of hope, fairness, and constitutional balance, finds itself at a perilous crossroads. The cover story in this issue of India Legal, written with characteristic insight and clarity by our Contributing Editor Dilip Bobb, raises a fundamental question: what happens when those entrusted with interpreting and upholding the law are themselves accused of violating it?
That this question is no longer rhetorical makes this story worthy of our cover. For the first time in recent memory, two sitting High Court judges face impeachment proceedings—one for allegedly hoarding unaccounted cash in his official residence, and the other for delivering an overtly communal speech at a political gathering. In any functioning democracy, this would spark national outrage, political introspection, and judicial soul-searching. In India, it has instead triggered a slow, muted institutional response—an inertia that points to deeper systemic flaws.
At the heart of this exposé lies a disturbing paradox. The judiciary is the one institution constitutionally empowered to hold all others accountable. Yet, when allegations arise from within its own ranks, the process becomes opaque, sluggish, and susceptible to political delay. The impeachment mechanisms, as the story outlines, are riddled with bottlenecks and shielded by procedural fog. Worse still, the prevailing in-house inquiry system is cloaked in secrecy, offering little public reassurance.
This is not merely a matter of internal disciplinary housekeeping. This is a national moment of reckoning.
The integrity of the judiciary is the bedrock of public trust in democracy. Without that trust, justice itself risks becoming an illusion—a fragile contract between citizen and state that begins to dissolve when arbiters of justice are seen as above scrutiny. The stakes could not be higher.
And yet, these current episodes are not isolated aberrations. As Dilip Bobb’s deeply researched piece shows, India’s judicial history is dotted with scandals—unexplained assets, political appointments post-retirement, bribe-taking allegations, and judicial “fixers” who operate behind the scenes. Many of these cases faded into oblivion, not because the accused were proven innocent, but because the system lacked the will—or courage—to pursue accountability to its logical end. This pattern of selective amnesia cannot continue.
To its credit, the current Chief Justice of India, BR Gavai, has acknowledged the corrosive effect of judicial misconduct on public confidence. His recent remarks in London, which we have highlighted in the cover story, call for transparency, ethical reform, and institutional introspection. He spoke with candour about post-retirement government appointments for judges, the need for public asset disclosures, and the judiciary’s responsibility to rebuild trust through decisive action.
But the responsibility cannot lie with one individual, no matter how high the office. Restoring legitimacy requires systemic reform—reform that includes an independent investigative body outside the judiciary’s own control, time-bound disciplinary processes, and the courage to uphold the law even when it implicates those in black robes.
For India Legal, reporting on judicial accountability is not merely a journalistic duty—it is central to our editorial mission. We exist to illuminate the legal process, expose its failings, and champion its principles when they are under threat. This cover story exemplifies that commitment.
The judiciary must remain independent, yes—but it must also remain answerable. Independence does not mean immunity. It does not mean silence in the face of misconduct. And it certainly does not mean accepting the notion that judges, unlike elected officials or bureaucrats, are above reproach simply by virtue of their position.
Let us be clear: this story is not an indictment of the entire judiciary. There are thousands of judges across India who serve with honour, integrity, and quiet determination under difficult conditions. But their credibility—and that of the institution they serve—is compromised when accountability is absent at the top.
In the global rankings of judicial efficiency, India sits embarrassingly low. Courtrooms are clogged, verdicts delayed, and justice postponed. That alone should have prompted soul-searching. Add to it these glaring questions of corruption and misconduct, and the silence becomes inexcusable.
The public has a right to demand better. Parliament has a duty to act. And the judiciary must summon the courage to police its own ranks—or submit to a structure that will. Because a judiciary that refuses to judge itself will soon be judged by others—by history, by the people, and by the very Constitution it was created to defend.
That is why this story is not just a headline. It is the very heart of our Republic’s current challenge. And that is why it belongs on our cover.
The post Who Judges The Judges? appeared first on India Legal.