Judiciary must stay above all suspicion
The judiciary and legislature must work together to evolve a transparent system and ensure people’s trust in the former remains intact
Three judges from three different high courts (justices Sheel Nagu, GS Sandhawalia and Anu Sivaraman) will investigate the case of a half-burnt pile of currency notes found at the residence of Delhi High Court (HC) judge, justice Yashwant Verma, who has since been relieved of his duties. Meanwhile, Chief Justice of India (CJI), Sanjeev Khanna, has decided to release Delhi HC chief justice DK Upadhyaya’s inquiry report in the matter in the public domain. It’s a first in the country’s legal history.
It’s important to take note of the letter addressed to justice Upadhyaya by justice Verma in his defence. Verma writes, “I unequivocally state that neither I nor any of my family members had stored or kept any cash or currency in that store room at any point of time. The very idea or suggestion that this cash was kept or stored by us is totally preposterous.” He further states, “I was totally shocked to see the contents of the videos that depicted something which was not found on site as I had seen it. It was this which prompted me to observe that this clearly appears to be a conspiracy to frame and malign me.”
The best brains in the judiciary demanded an inquiry from the moment the case came to light, but the country’s people would have been denied the truth had the media not gone to town with the story. It led to a senior advocate forcefully raising the matter with the chief justice of the Delhi HC. The story was unfolding when the news broke that justice Verma had been transferred to Allahabad HC. The Supreme Court also asked justice Upadhyaya to submit a report by the evening of that day.
Meanwhile, news that the Delhi fire department denied discovering any currency notes at the site of the incident started doing the rounds. The denial, instead of subduing the controversy, stoked the embers that had started to die since a few hours. Television commentators and social media influencers worked overtime to uncover the “conspiracy”. The Allahabad Bar Association sent a letter to the apex court lamenting the transfer of the judge to their court. They insisted that Allahabad HC isn’t a dustbin. The situation was getting out of hand, and the Delhi fire department’s statement had added fuel to the fire. They then insisted that no statement had been issued by their department.
Conspiracy theorists once again had a field day. They kept insisting that the matter was being brushed under the carpet. Using the controversy as a pretext, some senior advocates strongly condemned the collegium system. The system was designed to provide immunity to judges as a safeguard against undue interference and pressure and to maintain their impartiality. For this, a special privilege was given to the collegium that if accusations are levelled against any judge, only the Supreme Court should have the power to investigate the matter.
However, using this case as a pretext, many senior advocates have started questioning the collegium and its relevance. They are asking if such a large sum of money had been discovered at the premises of a bureaucrat, journalist, political leader, or lawyer, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) would have raided them by now. Had the person been a government employee, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Crime Branch of the police would have been activated long ago.
It is important to mention here an incident concerning justice Nirmal Yadav. Nirmal Yadav was a judge in the Punjab and Haryana HC in 2008, when she became the subject of an allegation that she was to receive ₹15 lakh as bribe, while the cash ended up at the doorstep of a judge with a similar name. The matter was investigated, and the CBI filed a chargesheet. The case is still in court while justice Yadav has retired.
In the case of Kolkata HC judge, justice Saumitra Sen, corruption allegations were proved against Sen. But before Parliament could initiate the impeachment process against him, he resigned. Was his resignation punishment enough? If Yadav and Sen were in any other profession, would the cases against them have proceeded in this manner?
Allegations have been levelled against many judges; some have been proven, and others remained in the realm of speculation. However, every time people came to know of such incidents, they raised the concern that judicial exceptionalism is becoming a roadblock in delivering justice. As the adage says, even Caesar’s wife should be above suspicion. At a personal level, I feel the judges must have special status so that they fulfil people’s expectations of delivering justice. Without a shred of doubt, many are doing the same. Still, there are some whose deeds and words are a source of embarrassment to the judiciary.
Justice Verma’s case is now not only a part of public discourse but has been mentioned in Parliament too. The speed and alacrity with which CJI Khanna has acted give us hope. Will our judiciary and legislature work together to evolve a transparent system and ensure people’s trust in the judicial system remains intact? A concerted move must be made in this direction.
Shashi Shekhar is editor-in-chief, Hindustan. The views expressed are personal