Last Updated:
The panel also raised concerns about the lack of action against Justice Shekhar Yadav, who has been accused of making hate-filled remarks
The justice department has been directed to respond in detail to all these concerns in the committee’s next meeting. Representational pic/PTI
In a crucial meeting of the parliamentary standing committee on law and justicemembers raised significant concerns on Tuesday about judicial accountability and questioned the government’s inaction in key cases involving members of the judiciary. The secretary of the law ministry’s justice department, along with other officials, appeared before the panel chaired by BJP Rajya Sabha member Brij Lal.
A major point of focus was the absence of an FIR against Justice Yashwant Varma. Members asked the justice department why no formal case had been initiated so far and whether the Chief Justice of India (CJI) had given consent to proceed. Officials responded that the government has acted solely based on the CJI’s recommendations, and so far, no directive for an FIR has been received. The committee has now formally asked the justice department to clarify in writing whether such consent was sought or granted, with a response expected at the next meeting.
The discovery of cash in March at Justice Varma’s official residence at 30 Tughlak Crescent in New Delhi. The money was located in a storeroom that was found to be under the covert or active control of Justice Varma and his family members. Varma was later transferred from the Delhi High Court back to the Allahabad High Court following the controversy.
The panel also raised concerns about the lack of action against Justice Shekhar Yadav, who has been accused of making hate-filled remarks. Officials stated that a written reply will be shared with the committee in due course.
Beyond individual cases, committee members flagged systemic issues, including the need for a formal code of conduct for judges to ensure neutrality and avoid ideological or political bias in courtrooms. Members claimed that some judges have attended ideologically driven meetings and made public statements critical of political parties, which undermines judicial independence.
Members also highlighted allegations that family members of sitting judges, who are practising in the same courts and living in the same government accommodation, could lead to perceived or actual conflicts of interest. A proposal was also put forward for a mandatory five-year cooling-off period for retired judges before they take up any post-retirement assignments.
The committee has strongly recommended that the code of conduct for judges be formalised through legislation. Members agreed that current guidelines lack enforceability and called for a comprehensive legal framework to ensure judicial integrity.
Additionally, the committee will undertake a field visit to Srinagar starting June 28 to assess the judicial infrastructure and facilities in Jammu and Kashmir.
The justice department has been directed to respond in detail to all these concerns in the committee’s next meeting.
- First Published:
Source link
[ad_3]
