Kapil Sibal calls out deep-rooted corruption in the judiciary after Justice Yashwant Varma’s transfer. He demands a more transparent judge appointment process.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Collegium recommended the transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma from the Delhi High Court to his parent High Court in Allahabad.
This decision came after a negative report was received against him. The matter has become important and serious, and many people are now talking about it.
Kapil Sibal, a senior advocate and also a Rajya Sabha MP, has spoken strongly on this topic. He said that corruption in the Indian judicial system is a matter of great concern and should not be taken lightly. In his words-
“The issue of corruption within the judiciary is a very serious issue.”
He also shared that this is not a new problem. Many senior lawyers and legal experts have been talking about this for a long time.
He pointed out-
“This is not something that has been articulated by senior councils and lawyers in the country for the first time. It has been going on for years.”
Sibal believes that now is the right time for the Supreme Court to seriously think about how judges are appointed in the country. According to him, the system of appointing judges should be made more clear and fair.
He said-
“It is time for the Supreme Court to start looking at issues of how the appointment process takes place. The appointment process should be more transparent and carefully done.”
He also criticised the current situation of corruption and disagreed with Prime Minister Modi’s views. Sibal claimed that instead of going down, corruption has actually grown.
As he said-
“Corruption is a very serious issue and despite what PM Modi has said the corruption has increased.”
This whole matter has now started a big discussion in legal and political circles. Many are demanding more transparency in the system and stricter steps to fight corruption in the judiciary. The public also wants to know more about how judges are selected and how the judicial system works behind closed doors.
As this situation develops, all eyes will be on how the Supreme Court and the Government respond to these serious concerns. People are hoping for a system where justice is fair, transparent, and free from corruption.
BACKGROUND
The Supreme Court Collegium decided to transfer Justice Yashwant Verma from the Delhi High Court back to his parent High Court Allahabad. Sources informed that this decision came after a significant amount of unaccounted cash was found in his official bungalow last week during the Holi holidays.
The cash discovered following a fire in the building, which prompted family members of the judge who was out of the city at the time to call emergency services, leading to police involvement.
Upon learning of the situation through official channels, the Collegium, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, opted to transfer Justice Verma.
Also Read: SC Collegium Recommends Two Judicial Officers For Appointment as Patna High Court Judges
Indira Jaising is a senior Indian lawyer and human rights activist known for her work in constitutional law, women’s rights, and judicial accountability remarked,
“A retired Sessions Court judge who convicted Sanjeev Bhatt is now being considered for a High Court appointment. Meanwhile, a High Court judge is found with a ‘pile of cash’ in his burning house. Have we lost the independence of the judiciary?”
As of now, Justice Verma has not commented on the cash discovery. Sources indicated that the Chief Justice viewed the situation very seriously, and the five-member Collegium agreed unanimously on the decision to transfer Justice Verma.
However, sources indicated that some members of the Collegium believed stricter measures were necessary to protect the judiciary’s reputation, which could significantly impact its ability to deliver justice to the public.
There was discussion about potentially asking Justice Verma to resign.
If he were to decline, some members suggested that the Chief Justice could initiate an internal inquiry, which would be the first step toward possible removal by Parliament.
In 1999, the Supreme Court established guidelines for addressing allegations of corruption, misconduct, and judicial irregularities involving judges of the Constitutional Court.
According to these guidelines, upon receiving a complaint, the Chief Justice first seeks a response from the judge in question. If the Chief Justice is not satisfied with the reply or believes further investigation is warranted, he will form an internal committee.
This committee is composed of one Supreme Court judge and two High Court Chief Justices. Once the committee submits its report, if the Chief Justice determines that the alleged misconduct is serious enough to warrant removal, he will request the judge to resign. Should the judge refuse, the Chief Justice will then notify the government to initiate removal proceedings through Parliament, as stipulated in Article 124(4) of the Constitution.
Article 124(4) of the Indian Constitution deals with the procedure for the removal of a Supreme Court judge. It states that:
- A Supreme Court judge can be removed only by an order of the President.
- The removal must be based on proved misbehavior or incapacity.
- This order must be passed after an address by Parliament, supported by a special majority (a majority of the total membership of each House and a two-thirds majority of members present and voting).
This provision ensures judicial independence by making it difficult to remove judges without strong and justified reasons.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
