Sharp comment of Supreme Court, every mistake or rude behavior does not come under the ambit of corruption.

The Supreme Court of the country has given a very important, balanced and clear decision regarding the Indian judicial system and the functioning of the judiciary. It is often seen that during hearings in courts, people or lawyers file disciplinary complaints against the judges regarding their strict attitude, delay in work or their harsh behaviour. While hearing this case, the Supreme Court has made it clear in clear words that any judge’s rude behavior, reluctance to work or any lapse at the administrative level does not in itself fall into the category of ‘dishonesty’ or corruption. With this decision of the court, a large legal scope has been set on complaints against judicial officers and judges without concrete evidence.

What was the whole matter and why did this question of judicial conduct arise?

This entire legal dispute came to a head when the process of disciplinary action was started at the administrative level regarding the conduct of some judicial officers of lower courts or high courts and delay in their decisions. Many times, clients or lawyers consider the anger of judges, their harsh attitude or slowness in disposal of cases as being linked to bad intentions or corruption. Understanding the seriousness of this matter, the Supreme Court clarified that the workload in the judiciary is very high, and in such a situation, a judge being harsh or delaying in taking a decision on a file may be an administrative failure or a part of human nature, but it is absolutely wrong to term it as malicious or dishonest conduct.

The fine distinction between powers, administrative control and accountability of judges

In this historic decision, the Supreme Court laid special emphasis on the fact that judges cannot be put under mental pressure in the name of accountability and administrative control. If any judicial order is passed by a judge which may also be legally flawed, the avenue of appeal or review in a higher court is always open to him. But to hang the sword of departmental inquiry on the mere grounds that a judge was not very lenient towards his colleagues or lawyers or was slow in disposing of the file, considering him outright dishonest or corrupt, weakens the morale of the justice system. While protecting judicial independence, the court said that it is very important for the judges to have an environment to take decisions in an independent and impartial manner.

This decision will have far-reaching effects on the lower courts and the justice system.

This decision of the Supreme Court has come as a big relief for the judiciary and judicial officers across the country. Judges working in lower courts often work in a stressful environment amidst heavy work pressure and complaints coming from all sides. After this clarification by the Supreme Court, the legal boundary has now been set as to what is the difference between genuine misconduct and human or administrative shortcomings. Experts believe that this decision will increase the confidence of judges to discharge their duties without any fear, which will ultimately strengthen the process of providing timely and fair justice to the common citizens of the country.