How Judges Escape the System They Created?

Are Judges Above the Law?
Judicial Immunity vs Accountability in India

India prides itself on having one of the most powerful and independent judiciaries in the world. The Constitution of India, in its wisdom, has granted judges immense protection to ensure they can dispense justice without fear or favor. But over the years, several controversies have sparked a burning question: Does judicial immunity mean judges are above the law—even when the allegations are about personal misconduct or corruption?

In recent years, three significant events have placed the Indian judiciary under public scrutiny:

 1. The Sexual Harassment Allegation Against CJI Ranjan Gogoi (2019)

What happened?

In April 2019, a former junior assistant of the Supreme Court accused the then Chief Justice of India, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, of sexual harassment and misuse of authority. She submitted a sworn affidavit to 22 judges detailing alleged misconduct and claimed that her family was harassed after she resisted.

The Judiciary’s Response:

• Justice Gogoi constituted a special bench, including himself, claiming a conspiracy against the judiciary.
• A three-judge in-house committee was formed without any external or independent member. The complainant withdrew citing procedural unfairness.
• The committee cleared Justice Gogoi of all charges. No FIR was filed.
• Post-retirement, Gogoi was nominated to the Rajya Sabha, triggering public concern over the appearance of political favoritism.

Was the POSH Act followed?

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 demands:

• An Internal Complaints Committee with an external member,
• Transparent procedure,
• Protection of the complainant.

None of these were followed.

Had this involved a common citizen, he would have been charged under Section 354A IPC (Sexual harassment) and arrested. Under BNSS, this is covered under Section 74(1)(i) BNSS, 2023, which penalizes sexually colored remarks and unwelcome advances.

Why the dual standard? When judges are accused, are even protective laws like POSH suspended?

2. Burnt Cash Row at Justice Yashwant Varma’s Residence (2025)

What happened?

In March 2025, a fire broke out in an outhouse of Delhi High Court Judge Justice Yashwant Varma’s official residence. Firefighters reportedly discovered bundles of burnt currency notes in the debris.

Response:

• Justice Varma and his wife were reportedly out of town. He called it a “conspiracy.”
• He was transferred to the Allahabad High Court. No FIR, no suspension.
• The Supreme Court initiated an in-house inquiry, but the findings were never made public.
• Later reports suggested the committee found procedural lapses—but not enough to initiate criminal action.

Why was no action taken under anti-corruption laws?

Had this involved a civil servant, charges would be filed under:

• Sections 7, 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and
• Sections 120B and 409 IPC (Criminal conspiracy and criminal breach of trust by public servant), now replaced by:
  • Section 109 BNSS (criminal conspiracy),
  • Section 316 BNSS (criminal breach of trust by public servant).

The judge was neither suspended nor prosecuted.

1. Should the government now initiate impeachment under Article 124(4)? Is it enough?
2. Or does BNSS not apply when misconduct concerns members of the judiciary? Or will it imply in new INDIA?
3. Rumors Around Justice J.S. Verma and Judicial Integrity

Justice J.S. Verma was widely respected and wrongly dragged into later corruption narratives. His name is often confused in discussions, though no concrete allegations were ever levelled against him. Yet, the erosion of faith in the judiciary owes much to real cases, like:

1. The Ghaziabad Provident Fund Scam – where district court officials allegedly siphoned ?23 crore, implicating names of judges, but none were tried.
2. The Justice I.M. Quddusi case – arrested by the CBI for allegedly facilitating bribes to influence medical college de-recognition cases.
3. Justice C.S. Karnan, who accused fellow judges of corruption, was instead sentenced to 6 months imprisonment for contempt under Contempt of Courts Act, without any probe into his claims.

All these incidents highlight a disturbing pattern:

Accusation # Investigation, unless it suits the judicial establishment.

What Does the Constitution Say?

Judges enjoy extensive constitutional safeguards:

Article 124(4): Removal only via impeachment by both Houses of Parliament on grounds of misbehavior or incapacity.

Article 121: No discussion in Parliament about the conduct of judges, except during impeachment.

Judicial Immunity: Judges are immune for judicial acts, meaning they can’t be sued or prosecuted for the judgments they deliver.

But what about non-judicial conduct—like sexual harassment or corruption?

Why This Is Dangerous: Unchecked Power Breeds Contempt

The judiciary is the only constitutional body that is self-governed, self-regulated, and practically beyond investigation. While this was intended to uphold independence, it has created a perception of invincibility.

When:

1. A CJI accused of harassment gets parliamentary nomination,
2. A judge with burnt cash nearby is transferred, not tried,
3. POSH Act and Corruption laws are not even invoked,

…it prompts a chilling realization: Justice is applied differently to those who deliver it.

What Reforms Are Needed?

1. Independent Judicial Complaints Commission

Modeled after the UK or Canada, an independent body should investigate allegations against judges—not collegium-controlled panels.

2. Transparent In-House Committees

Committee reports must be made public. Complainants should get legal support and representation.

3. Revamped Code of Judicial Conduct

A binding, enforceable code with graded penalties for misconduct.

4. Criminal Accountability for Non-Judicial Acts

Judicial immunity should not extend to acts outside the courtroom. Judges must be equally liable under:

• POSH Act,
• Prevention of Corruption Act,
• IPC/BNSS provisions.

Final Question: Where Is Equality Before Law?

We boast of “Justice for All” and “Equality Before the Law” (Article 14 of the Constitution).
But:

• If a CJI isn’t even subjected to a POSH-compliant inquiry...
• If no FIR is filed when cash is found at a judge’s home...
• If contempt is used to silence whistleblowers...

Then we must ask:

1. Is this truly equality before law?
2. Are judges still the guardians of justice—or merely the last people left untouched by it?

Image (c) istock.com