Delhi High Court judge cash scandal: Is an in-house inquiry sufficient?

India Today

The Supreme Court Collegium recommended the repatriation of Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, who is facing a probe into the alleged discovery of huge cash from his residence, to his parent Allahabad High Court.

Transcript

00:00So, who will judge the judges?

00:02Is an in-house inquiry sufficient in a case like this?

00:06What is now the ideal way to probe our judges?

00:08How do we restore public faith in judiciary?

00:15Joining me now to answer those big questions, two very special guests.

00:18I'm joined by Justice Madan Lokur, retired Supreme Court judge, and by Justice Sanjeev

00:23Banerjee, former Chief Justice of the High Courts of Madras and Meghalaya.

00:28Great, both of you joining me on the show.

00:30That central question, who will judge the judges, is an in-house inquiry of the kind

00:35that has been ordered by the present Chief Justice, in your view, good enough?

00:39I ask this to both of you.

00:41Justice Lokur, why don't you take that first?

00:43Is this in-house procedure good enough to restore public faith in the judiciary?

00:47Yes, thank you, Rajdeep.

00:50You know, so far as the present inquiry that you are adverting to about the cash being

00:57found at the residence of a judge, I don't think the present in-house inquiry would

01:03be sufficient because there are a lot of issues that have been raised.

01:09So it will have to be a sort of an investigation, both by the police and by the fire department

01:16because of the response given by the judge.

01:20But you know, it depends upon each case.

01:24There are some cases in the past where the in-house inquiry has worked.

01:30For example, I remember doing a case in 2008 when I was a judge in Delhi High Court.

01:36Two Chief Justices were also judges in the in-house inquiry and we did a very good job.

01:45You know, we gave a report in a short time.

01:48So that's not a problem.

01:49So it really depends upon each case.

01:52Okay, but you're saying in this particular case, given the circumstances, it calls more

01:56for a police investigation or at least a substantial criminal investigation and not just the in-house

02:04inquiry.

02:05Am I correct?

02:06Yes.

02:07Yes.

02:08Yes.

02:09Okay.

02:10Justice Banerjee, your view?

02:11I think the first step is good and in-house inquiry is good enough, but that in-house

02:18inquiry should have, the members of that committee should have access to police and

02:23the fire brigade officials and rely on some investigation report from them.

02:30So in a sense, I'm agreeing with Justice Lokur, but it should be done by the committee.

02:36And once the committee comes out with a report, and it should be as quick as possible, thereafter,

02:42you know, law can take its own course.

02:47But should that report, Justice Banerjee, be made?

02:49So should that report, Justice Banerjee, be made public?

02:52Because the fact is the general fear is this in-house inquiry is extremely opaque.

02:57And therefore, the public's right to know will not be there.

02:59Today, the judge has already been transferred formally to Allahabad.

03:03So we will never know the reality unless that report is made public.

03:09I think it should be made public now that so many facts have come to light.

03:14We were dealing with allegations till day before yesterday.

03:16Several facts have come to light.

03:18And we must know who the other players involved are.

03:22There are several names which are doing the rounds.

03:25You know, if there are no fixers, you won't get people to fix.

03:29So we must find who are the persons at both ends.

03:36And we should get to the bottom of this.

03:39Because let's not hide facts.

03:40There is corruption in the judiciary.

03:43But it's probably not to the extent as you make it out to be at the moment that almost

03:48everyone is.

03:50Most judges are honest.

03:52But there are black sheep and they have to be exposed and thrown out.

03:57And that is what we as an institution have failed to do.

04:01And we must address this immediately.

04:04Justice Loco, do you agree with that, that if and when the report is ready, it should

04:09be made public?

04:10Justice Banerjee seems to believe that that is the only way you will eventually come to

04:15the root of the problem, which is corruption in a section of the judiciary.

04:19Yes.

04:21You see, it will eventually be made public.

04:24You know, in the sense that assuming the judge is found guilty by the in-house committee

04:33and the Chief Justice of India accepts the view of the in-house committee, the impeachment

04:38proceedings will start, in which event it will obviously become public.

04:43The problem may arise if the judge is found not guilty by the in-house committee.

04:51In that event, of course, if it's made public, good for the judge.

04:58You mentioned there briefly the word impeachment and the fear, Justice Loco, is that impeachment

05:03being such an arduous process, it is almost impossible to impeach the judge.

05:09Therefore, let us assume, not this specific judge, but any judge tomorrow who is found

05:14to be corrupt or is known to be corrupt, can he be impeached as easily, particularly in

05:19the higher judiciary?

05:20Now, the problem is in the lower judiciary, there's already allegations of massive corruption.

05:24It's now spreading to the higher judiciary.

05:26Is impeachment the answer?

05:27Do we need to find a better way, a quicker, better, time-bound way to ensure doodh ka

05:33doodh, paani ka paani?

05:35You see, impeachment is a process.

05:40After the process is over, after the process of impeachment is over, a person may be guilty,

05:44a person may be innocent.

05:47So impeachment is the process.

05:49Now I think everywhere, it is this process of impeachment that is followed.

05:57Now there are two things.

05:58One is that, should a committee sit to look into the matter before the process starts

06:09or should it be a little later?

06:11You see, because after this, once the impeachment process starts, assuming the judge is found

06:16guilty, under the Judge's Inquiry Act, there will be another inquiry.

06:22So one could argue that why should there be two inquiries?

06:30But this inquiry, the in-house inquiry, is only for the purpose of advising the Chief

06:34Justice of India whether something has gone wrong and if so, what is it that has gone

06:40wrong, so that if necessary, he can have an inquiry under the Judge's Inquiry Act.

06:47Impeachment specifically, Justice Banerjee, does it really work in the context of India

06:51and all these decades, it's never really reached fruition?

06:56It is a political process.

06:58So therefore, it's subject to, you know, political considerations.

07:04Once it cleared one of the houses and the judge resigned at the end of it without waiting

07:12for the fate in the other house.

07:15But you know, there should be an in-house process, a memorandum of procedure and none

07:21better than Justice Lokur and minds like him to set it down, both as to what should be

07:26done in cases like this, where there is a set of rules that would be followed and also

07:33about the collegium system.

07:35And I mentioned the collegium system because this must not be used as an excuse to dismantle

07:41the collegium system because then the independence of the judiciary will be gone.

07:46There are ways to improve it, but this must not be the excuse.

07:50As I hear it bandied all around that that should go, but until we have a better process,

07:56this is the best.

07:57You know, unless we are, until we have a better process, this is the best.

08:00But critics will say, Justice Banerjee, it's a cozy club.

08:04You know, will judges be able to really do the kind of honest job that they are required

08:09to do when it involves a fellow judge with whom they may have a relationship?

08:15You know, the committee members have been chosen, hopefully, with the confidence of

08:21the Chief Justice of India.

08:22And there you must have some faith in the institution, in the office of the Chief Justice

08:27of India, that he would have chosen men of merit, of impeccable integrity, who will get

08:34to the bottom of this.

08:35You know, the fact is, though, Justice Lokur, there is this diminishing public faith.

08:41Now, you could call it that this is speculation, these are rumors, this is gossip, innuendo.

08:45The corridors of the Supreme Court and various courts are full of all kinds of gossip and

08:51innuendo.

08:52But, daal mein kuch toh kala hai.

08:55So, therefore, do you really believe that an in-house system, a cozy club, can actually

09:01bring a resolution to cases of corruption?

09:05Yeah, you see, I don't know what you mean by a cozy club.

09:10OK, now look at it like this.

09:13If a bureaucrat commits a crime of, say, corruption, a departmental inquiry is held by whom?

09:24By his senior or somebody superior to him.

09:28If a policeman does something wrong, a departmental inquiry is held by whom?

09:35By a senior police officer.

09:37So, this system, you know, whether it pertains to bureaucrats, whether it pertains to the

09:43police, whether it pertains to judges, whether it pertains to anybody else, it's the people

09:48who are there, you know, their peers, who judge whether something wrong has been done

09:53or not.

09:55So, this cozy club idea, you know, it's a nice expression, but I don't think it works.

10:02OK, let me give you some hard facts, Justice Banerjee and Justice Lokot.

10:07Declaration of assets of high court judges.

10:10Less than 7% of high court judges in India have publicly declared their assets.

10:14Assets declared publicly only by 49 of 763 sitting high court judges.

10:18Zero judges from 18 of the 25 high courts have declared their assets.

10:22Justice Banerjee, should there be, therefore, compulsory mandatory asset declaration

10:26and an audit every year?

10:29Absolutely.

10:30Absolutely.

10:31That is imperative.

10:33But I don't think that the assets should be made public.

10:36That is where a lot of judges fear.

10:39But declaration of assets every year with an audit is absolutely imperative.

10:45And there should be some mechanism available to the judiciary itself to undertake this

10:52kind of an investigation and audit.

10:54There could be a judicial audit kind of service.

10:58Like there should be a judicial management service.

11:03Justice Lokot, do you agree with Justice Banerjee?

11:06Compulsory mandatory asset declaration?

11:09Absolutely.

11:10Absolutely.

11:11You see, so far as the district judiciary is concerned, all right, they have to declare

11:16their assets every year.

11:19And they put it in a sealed cover and give it to the district judge and perhaps give

11:23it to the high court.

11:25All right.

11:26Now, so far as government officials are concerned, they also have to declare their assets.

11:30If not every year, every two years.

11:34Okay.

11:35So there you have it.

11:36Asset declaration is a clarion call being given by the former judges saying there must

11:42be compulsory mandatory asset declaration by our judges and a proper audit there.

Category

Transcript

Recommended