Judicial Conduct and Controversies in 2024

The year 2024 has been marked by serious concerns regarding the conduct of judges in India’s High Courts. The Supreme Court has faced a troubling trend of communal and sexist remarks made by sitting judges. This prompted the Supreme Court to form multiple five-judge Benches to address the fallout from these statements. The situation has escalated with a pending motion for the removal of Allahabad High Court judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, initiated by 55 Rajya Sabha MPs due to his controversial comments about the Muslim community.

Judicial Remarks and Public Response

Judicial remarks have drawn public backlash this year. Justice Yadav’s comments at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event suggested that the nation should cater to the majority’s wishes. His statements implied a stark division in societal values between communities. This has raised questions about the impartiality expected from judges. The public response has been overwhelmingly critical, demanding accountability.

Supreme Court’s Handling of Controversies

The Supreme Court’s approach to various cases has been inconsistent. In the case of Justice V. Srishananda, the court took suo motu cognisance of his derogatory remarks about a Muslim-dominated area and sexist comments towards a woman lawyer. The Chief Justice emphasised transparency in judicial proceedings. However, in Justice Yadav’s case, the Supreme Court opted for a more restrained approach, leading to accusations of a lack of accountability.

Key Incidents of 2024

Several incidents illustrate the judiciary’s challenges this year. Justice Rajbir Sehrawat questioned the Supreme Court’s authority, prompting the court to remind judges of their responsibilities. Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay’s accusations against fellow judge Justice Sou

Answer Hints:

1. What were the key incidents involving judges in 2024 that raised concerns about their conduct?

1. Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav’s comments at a VHP event sparked public outrage and a motion for his removal.
2. Justice V. Srishananda faced scrutiny for derogatory remarks about a Muslim area and sexist comments, leading to suo motu proceedings.
3. Justice Rajbir Sehrawat’s challenge to the Supreme Court’s authority raised alarms about judicial decorum.
4. Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay accused a fellow judge of political bias, resulting in a Supreme Court intervention.
5. These incidents highlight a troubling trend of communal and sexist remarks among judges, undermining public trust in the judiciary.

2. How did the Supreme Court respond to the controversies surrounding judges in 2024?

1. The Supreme Court formed multiple five-judge Benches to address the fallout from judges’ controversial remarks.
2. In Justice Srishananda’s case, the court emphasized transparency by taking suo motu cognizance of his remarks.
3. For Justice Yadav, the Supreme Court opted for a more restrained and less public approach, leading to criticism.
4. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud advocated for openness in judicial proceedings, contrasting with the handling of Justice Yadav’s case.
5. The inconsistent responses have raised questions about accountability and the integrity of the judiciary.

3. What implications do these judicial controversies have on public perception of the judiciary?

1. The remarks by judges have led to public backlash, questioning their impartiality and professionalism.
2. There is growing concern that judges may not uphold the principles of justice and equality.
3. Inconsistent handling of cases reflects poorly on the judiciary’s commitment to accountability.
4. The controversies could erode public trust and confidence in the judicial system.
5. Calls for reform and stricter oversight of judicial conduct are likely to increase as a result.

4. What measures could be taken to improve judicial conduct and accountability?

1. Implementing stricter guidelines and codes of conduct for judges to prevent communal and sexist remarks.
2. Enhancing transparency in judicial proceedings to build public trust.
3. Establishing independent oversight bodies to investigate allegations against judges.
4. Encouraging judicial education programs focusing on ethics and community sensitivity.
5. Promoting a culture of accountability within the judiciary, ensuring that all judges are held to the same standards.