Senior Supreme Court advocate and former Orissa High Court Chief Justice S. Muralidhar said questioning those in power is essential to ensure accountability. He stressed that a strong and independent judiciary remains the only reliable mechanism to uphold democratic checks and balances.
Senior Supreme Court advocate and former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, S. Muralidhar, said on Tuesday that it is essential to ask questions of those in power to ensure accountability, and that the only reliable way to achieve this is through a strong judiciary.
He added that the judiciary must be willing to support people in seeking answers from the government.
Speaking at the launch of a quiz book in Bengaluru titled “Ready for the Law Challenge”, authored by his former intern Raghav Chakravarthy, Muralidhar participated in a panel discussion on the theme “Curiosity, Democracy and Public Life.”
ALSO READ: New Criminal Laws Fail to Decolonize Legal System: Retd. Justice S Muralidhar
Muralidhar added during the conversation,
“As a lawyer and, of course, later as a judge, you begin to realise the only way you can really influence accountability of those in power is to have a strong judiciary. A judiciary that lends its hand to people wanting answers from the government. And the more and more judges realise that they are meant to do this very primary fundamental duty as a constitutional court, we’ll have a better country,”
He explained that the book idea began at the Delhi High Court in 2011, when Chakravarthy was interning with Justice S. Muralidhar. Chakravarthy had shared that he was going to Sweden after winning a national quiz organised by the Swedish Embassy. Muralidhar then suggested that he compile a question bank and make it available to lawyers across the country.
When asked about Safai Karmachari Andolan, Muralidhar noted that the PIL was filed in 2003, three years before he became a judge. He explained that through this process, the petitioners were able to secure information from states across India in ways that were not possible through RTI applications alone.
He said,
“what we could not have got through RTI applications, and otherwise, we were able to get responses from states across the country.”
He then discussed how those responses initially denied that manual scavenging was taking place. He explained that this led to further steps, including producing video clips and collecting personal testimonies to demonstrate that the practice existed. He described the effort as prolonged and ongoing, even if full success had not yet been achieved.
He said,
“We had to then produce video clips.We had to produce personal testimonies to make them accept that it was happening, and it was a long struggle, so that was another big, big step forward in trying to eradicate the practice; it’s not been entirely successful, but that’s a fight that will go on.”
Earlier in his remarks, he reiterated the central role of the judiciary in enforcing accountability, saying,
“As a lawyer, and of course later as a judge, you begin to realise that the only way you can really enforce accountability of those in power is a strong judiciary, ”
He said,
“Law an ocean”
Elaborating on the influence of law and its development, Muralidhar said that legal developments happen constantly. He also pointed to the impact of the RTI movement and the RTI Act, explaining that it emerged from local protests where people demanded answers from local administrations.
He added,
“The RTI movement followed with the RTI Act. It came through small protests of this nature, in which they asked questions of the local administration. It’s so important to ask questions of whoever is in power to enforce accountability. Democracy in the court, of course, as a judge, as a lawyer, you keep filing petitions where you don’t get responses from the government otherwise. The government is forced to come and respond to the court.”
On the role of curiosity in his life and in democracy, Muralidhar referred to the MK case movement in Rajasthan, saying people asked a straightforward question to their panchayats about how project funds were being used and why account details were not being shared. He explained that the movement began by demanding transparency in accounts, calling it one of the most effective tools people have.
He said,
“Just to see the power of the people is the MK case movement in Rajasthan.”
He added,
“Money is allocated for projects in this area; what’s happened to that money? Show us the accounts; that’s how the entire movement started, and it’s one of the most powerful tools,”
He further stated that legal interest is often sparked through daily news and society-related events that could potentially become cases. He noted that lawyers, by their training, quickly learn that much of their learning happens in court through practice and exposure.
READ ALSO: Justice (Retired) S Murlidhar: Judges do make political choices
At the same time, he pointed out that it isn’t possible to master every branch of law because legal knowledge is “vast like an ocean,” he said where people may only gain experience in the specific areas handled by their seniors.
He noted that while watching others in court helps, learning is still limited, and rapid changes in the law can make it hard to keep up even with formal systems like law academies.
Finally, he emphasised that quizzes can help make learning enjoyable and can reduce rigid hierarchies, allowing talent to emerge regardless of age or position.
He concluded by saying,
“And quizzes somehow break down hierarchies. The brightest mind could be the youngest,”