In News:

The recent recovery of large sums of cash from the residence of Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma has reignited the debate over transparency and accountability in India’s higher judiciary. This incident underscores the pressing need for a legal framework mandating the public disclosure of assets by judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts—currently one of the few segments of public office bearers exempt from such transparency norms.

Current Norms and Judicial Practice

In 1997, the Supreme Court under then Chief Justice J.S. Verma adopted a resolution requiring judges to declare their assets (including those of spouses and dependents) to the Chief Justice. However, this was an internal exercise, with no provision for public disclosure.

In 2009, responding to public pressure and a Right to Information (RTI) application, the Supreme Court resolved to allow voluntary disclosures on its website. While asset declarations were briefly published starting November 2009, the practice faded. Since 2018, the SC website has not been updated, and declarations by current or former judges are no longer publicly available.

In a landmark judgment in 2019, the Supreme Court ruled that judges' assets and liabilities are not “personal information” and hence fall within the scope of RTI. Despite this, judicial compliance with voluntary disclosures remains minimal.

High Court Practices and Resistance

As of March 1, 2024, only 97 of the 770 sitting High Court judges (less than 13%) across seven High Courts (Delhi, Punjab & Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Madras, Chhattisgarh, Kerala, and Karnataka) have publicly declared their assets. Many High Courts have outright rejected RTI applications or passed resolutions opposing the idea of asset disclosure. For example, in 2012, the Uttarakhand High Court strongly objected to bringing judges’ assets under RTI. The Allahabad High Court, and several others including Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Bombay, have also denied such information under RTI citing exemptions.

Comparison with Other Public Servants

In stark contrast, civil servants, ministers, and elected representatives in India are bound by law or convention to publicly disclose their assets:

• Civil Servants: Must annually declare assets to their cadre-controlling authority; many states such as Gujarat and Kerala make this information accessible via RTI.
• Union Ministers and MPs: Since 2009, ministers submit asset declarations to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), which are available on its website. MPs submit declarations to the Speaker or Chairperson, which can be accessed through RTI.
• Election Candidates: A 2002 Supreme Court judgment mandates detailed public asset disclosure as part of the nomination process. Even minor errors can disqualify a candidate.

Legislative Recommendations and the Way Forward

Recognizing the gap, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice recommended in 2023 that legislation be introduced to mandate asset disclosures by judges. However, no progress has been made on this front.

In a democratic setup, the judiciary must not only be impartial but also seen as such. Mandatory public asset disclosure is a vital step toward strengthening judicial accountability and restoring public trust in the institution. Balancing judicial independence with transparency is essential for good governance and ethical public administration.