By Khursheed Haider Zaidi

“Thou Brutus Too?” — Shakespeare

Never before in its history have the bar and bench of the Supreme Court of India been shaken by charges of corruption as they have been in the tenure of Chief Justice of India Shri Deepak Misra.

There were media reports that an in-house inquiry committee was constituted against Justice Narain Shukla of the Allahabad High Court over allegations connected with the medical scam case. There was also speculation that some Supreme Court judges themselves might have been influenced in the medical scam and that suspicion had been raised towards the Chief Justice of India.

It is important to note that these matters concern allegations and reports regarding the judiciary and should not be treated as established facts unless determined by the competent authorities or courts.

Historical Concerns About Judicial Corruption

Going back to the history of corruption in the Bombay High Court, a brief-case containing Rs. 1.5 lakhs was reportedly found in the personal toilet of a judge in the Bombay High Court in 1990. Another judge of the same court was accused of influencing verdicts at the behest of a lady.

There was also a reference to Justice M. P. Kenia, who reportedly fired his salvo in a move in the Advocates’ Association regarding his inability to continue his association in the hearing of a multi-crore property dispute case. It was later alleged that certain connections existed between persons involved in the matter.

The article raises broader questions about judicial integrity, independence and accountability.

Allegations Against Judges and the Need for Accountability

The article points to several instances in which judges have faced allegations of corruption or misconduct.

For example, it refers to Rachna Tiwari Lakhanpal, described as a senior civil judge at the Tis Hazari District Courts. According to the article, she and her husband were arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) following an allegation that she had accepted a bribe of Rs. 4 lakh from an advocate in a case she was adjudicating.

The article also mentions the suspension of an Additional Special Judge for CBI cases by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, following allegations of corruption based on a complaint filed by the CBI.

Another case discussed concerns a Special Judge who allegedly accepted a bribe of Rs. 5 crore to grant bail to a former Karnataka Minister in connection with an illegal mining case.

These examples are presented in the original article as allegations and reported incidents, rather than as a finding that corruption is widespread across the judiciary.

Corruption in Lower Courts

The article observes that corruption in lower courts has often been discussed as a serious concern. It claims that, according to prevailing perceptions, rates may be demanded for quicker hearings, bail or favourable verdicts.

However, judicial independence must remain protected while ensuring accountability. Judges should not be immune from legitimate demands for justice for misconduct.

The article suggests that there may be several grounds for judicial censure or removal, including bribery, corruption, commission of a felony and senility, subject to applicable law and due process.

Accountability of Higher Courts

A major question raised by the article is whether higher courts should also be accountable for monitoring the functioning of subordinate courts.

Subordinate courts function under the supervision of High Courts, and therefore the article argues that High Courts should take responsibility for monitoring district courts rather than leaving such supervision entirely to individual judges.

It further suggests that inspection of subordinate courts should be strengthened through regular inspections, proper reporting and follow-up mechanisms.

Need for Dedicated Monitoring

The article proposes that a dedicated mechanism or staff should be available to monitor district courts effectively.

It suggests that inspection reports should not simply be prepared and filed away. Instead, reports should be examined carefully, appropriate action should be considered where necessary, and follow-up should be carried out on complaints registered against individual judges.

A system of continuous monitoring, according to the article, could help improve transparency and accountability within the judicial system.

The Role of the Judiciary in a Democracy

The article argues that the judiciary plays a crucial role in protecting the rights of citizens and maintaining the rule of law.

It emphasizes that even when only a small number of judges are accused of misconduct, such allegations can affect public confidence in the entire institution. The judiciary therefore has a responsibility to address credible allegations through appropriate procedures.

At the same time, the vast majority of serving judges are described as hardworking, intelligent and honest. The article acknowledges that allegations involving a few individuals should not automatically be used to judge the entire judicial system.

Protecting Judicial Independence While Ensuring Accountability

Judicial independence is essential for democracy. Judges must be able to decide cases without fear, pressure or external influence.

However, independence does not mean complete immunity from scrutiny. Where credible allegations of misconduct arise, there must be transparent and lawful mechanisms to examine them.

The challenge is to maintain a balance between protecting judges from improper interference and ensuring that genuine complaints are investigated properly.

Public Confidence in the Judiciary

The credibility and image of the judiciary are important because justice depends not only on decisions being made, but also on public confidence in the institution making those decisions.

The article argues that when allegations of corruption or misconduct become public, they can damage the reputation of the judiciary even when the allegations concern only a limited number of individuals.

For this reason, maintaining transparency, accountability and ethical standards is essential.

Justice and the Common Citizen

Judges are ultimately public servants entrusted with significant responsibility. Their decisions can affect people’s property, liberty, careers and lives.

Society therefore expects the judicial system to remain fair, impartial and accessible. Shortcuts in the administration of justice can have serious consequences for ordinary citizens.

The article concludes with a call for stronger accountability, effective monitoring and continued efforts to preserve the credibility of the judicial system.

Conclusion

The allegations and incidents discussed in this article highlight an important principle: judicial independence and judicial accountability must go hand in hand.

A strong judiciary requires not only independent judges but also effective systems for addressing genuine complaints and allegations of misconduct. Transparency, proper supervision and adherence to due process can help strengthen public confidence in the administration of justice.

The objective should not be to undermine the judiciary, but to ensure that the institution remains worthy of the trust placed in it by citizens.

Source: Article titled “Thou Brutus Too? — Corruption charges rock the judiciary”, attributed to Khursheed Haider Zaidi, Advocate, Chamber No. 666, Gali No. 17, G.B. Nagar.

Important editorial note: The allegations and historical incidents mentioned above are presented as reported in the supplied source material. Before publishing, verify names, dates, case details and legal status against authoritative records, and avoid presenting allegations as established facts unless they have been judicially determined.