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.