Introduction
India’s judiciary is a cornerstone of its democratic system—but recent controversies have spotlighted serious gaps in judicial accountability and appointment transparency. From the collegium’s opaque functioning to in-house misconduct investigations like the Justice Yashwant Varma cash row, public faith in the institution hinges on its commitment to ethical standards and procedural clarity.
Background: The Collegium System & Transparency Deficit
1. Opacity of Collegium Functions
-
The collegium system, created in 1993, entrusts senior judges with recommending appointments and transfers. Initially shrouded in secrecy, attempts at partial transparency began in 2017. But between late 2019 and 2025, detailed resolutions—including reasons—stopped being shared publicly. Some High Courts never disclosed such decisions at all.
The Times of India+15Supreme Court Observer+15The Times of India+15Reddit+4Wikipedia+4The Times of India+4
2. Constitutional Critique & Judicial Pushback
-
Former Chief Justices and judges like DY Chandrachud and Kurian Joseph acknowledged flaws—advocating for greater transparency without compromising independence. The late Justice J.S. Verma had even urged that the judiciary fall under the ambit of the RTI Act to uphold public trust.
The Times of IndiaWikipediaWikipedia
Efforts Toward Transparency and Reform
1. Publication of Collegium Resolutions & Criteria
-
Since 2017, the Supreme Court began uploading collegium resolutions online. While resolutions after 2019 lacked detail, recent practice under CJI B.R. Gavai aims to restore clarity: publicizing reasons, objective criteria (merit, integrity, diversity), and acknowledging societal representation.
Business Standard+2Supreme Court Observer+2The Economic Times+2
2. Process Enhancements & Evaluation Mechanisms
-
As part of improved vetting, the Centre for Research & Planning circulates candidate judgments; a Judgment Evaluation Committee grades them; and recommendations are assessed against transparent benchmarks.
Hindustan Times+2Reddit+2The Hindu+2
3. CJI’s Assurance of ‘Complete Transparency’
-
CJI Gavai reaffirmed that the collegium will pursue full transparency and inclusivity, ensuring merit-based, unbiased appointments going forward.
Reddit+11Business Standard+11The Economic Times+11
Judicial Accountability Amid Crisis: The Varma Cash Row
Justice Yashwant Varma Case (March–July 2025)
-
A fire at Varma’s official residence exposed large amounts of cash. A CJI-appointed panel investigated, declaring possible misconduct, and recommended removal. Varma challenged the panel’s procedural fairness in the Supreme Court.
The Times of India+2Wikipedia+2The Times of India+2
Top Court’s Focus on Ethics
-
CJI Gavai responded by emphasizing that judicial misconduct severely erodes public trust, stressing the need for transparent internal inquiry procedures.
politico.com+15Business Standard+15The Times of India+15
Challenges & Criticisms
-
Unaccountable Decision-Making: Collegium discussions are confidential, and internal notes (e.g. supersession or allocations) are not accessible, fostering opacity.
Reddit+6The Hindu+6Supreme Court Observer+6 -
Caste & Elite Domination: Criticism persists that appointments favor upper-caste, elite families. Studies suggest over 70% of SC/HC appointees in recent years belong to a narrow social cohort.
Wikipedia+1Reddit+1 -
Decline in Accountability Mechanisms: High Courts have dismissed PILs seeking transparency in appointment procedures and detailed data about pending recommendations.
The Indian Express+3SCC Online+3The New Indian Express+3
Way Forward: Reform Proposals
✅ Institutional Measures
-
Re-publication of detailed reasons for every collegium resolution.
-
Regular update of pending vs cleared appointments.
-
Formalizing feedback and grievance channels.
✅ Legislative Oversight & Ethics Codes
-
Consider constitutional amendments or new legislation to codify transparent appointment norms.
-
Introduce enforceable judicial ethics codes and disclosure requirements.
✅ Independent Accountability Frameworks
-
Establish independent oversight bodies (possibly from retired judges and parliamentarians) for misconduct inquiries.
-
Reinforce procedural rights for judges facing internal inquiries.
Conclusion
India’s judiciary stands at a crossroads: the imperative to maintain institutional independence must balance with urgent demands for accountability and transparency. The collegium’s transformation under CJI Gavai, paired with public disclosures on misconduct cases like Varma’s, signals progress—but structural reforms remain incomplete. For constitutional democracy to flourish, the judiciary must embrace openness, integrity, and procedural justice.