The Indian Judicial System is independent and impartial. Rather, this is the only pillar of the Indian Democracy in which all Indians have full faith and confidence. This faith is amply demonstrated by the fact that every day large number of new cases are being instituted in the Courts all over the country. The Indian Judiciary is thus one of the strongest pillars of Indian democracy.
The Indian Judiciary is independent and separate from the Government and the legislature. The Judges of Indian Courts have maintained very high standards of judicial integrity. This fact has also been recognized by the international business community. This is one of the main reasons for multi-national corporations entering into joint ventures with Indian business houses and also investing billions of Dollars in India to set up not only huge industrial units and develop town-ships but also develop Indian’s infrastructure.
However, few people are feeling that the justice delivery system in India is not only expensive but also very time consuming. It is estimated that there are about 250 million cases pending in the various courts in India. This

huge backlog is causing delay in getting justice. Some are even alleging that “justice delayed is justice denied”. For speedier justice some litigants are also indulging in corrupt malpractices. The high cost of litigation is mainly due to exorbitant fees being charged by lawyers.
In the past couple of years few allegations of corruption in the judiciary have been reported in the newspapers (Sumit Mukherjee scandal of Delhi High Court; club scandal of Punjab High Court; the Ghaziababad Provident Fund scandal etc.). Dalai Lama, the Nobel laureate, has equated corruption in Indian Judiciary with “pocket money”. Even the Vice President of India, Mr. Hamid Ansari, has stated, while delivering his valedictory address at the International Conference of Jurists, that, “The challenge to the supremacy of rule of law is elite behaviour. National and international media is full of reports of how the elite are able to subvert the rule of law with money or influence. A large swathe of society and polity even accept this situation as a way of life.” He also stated that corruption “shakes the legitimacy of the state, erodes sovereignty of the state and its capacity to exercise sovereign functions including ensuring law and order for the citizens”.
A study conducted by Centre for Media Studies in 2005 revealed that “during the last one year, three-fifths (61%) of respondents had paid money to lawyers, whereas 29% had paid money to court officials, and 15% paid money to middle men to get their work done.” This study had made many valuable suggestions for reforming the judiciary. One of these was that a new judge, before taking up the appointment, should declare his or her assets and liabilities. A couple of months ago the Delhi High Court upheld the order of the Central Information Commission under the Right to Information (RTI) Act directing the Supreme Court of India to declare the assets of the Judges of the Supreme Court. Against this judgement an appeal is pending before the Supreme Court. In spite of the pending appeal the Supreme Court Judges have now declared their assets.

As regards corruption in the judiciary, the Bar Association of Bangalore recently raised a controversy on the contemplated elevation of their Chief Judge as a Judge of the Supreme Court of India. They alleged that the said Judge had accumulated huge wealth, which was disproportionate to his means, when he was a Judge of the subordinate judiciary. Senior Advocates of the Supreme Court and also other States Bar Associations voiced their concern on this issue. Consequently, the said Judge was not elevated (the allegations of corruption against the said Judge have yet to be established). In the past, peers’ pressure has worked in ensuring that a Judge, against whom allegations of misconduct are established, voluntarily resigns from his post.
A Judge of the Supreme Court or any State High Court can be removed for misconduct only by the Indian Parliament by the process of Impeachment. In 1993 a motion was moved in the Parliament to remove Justice V. Ramaswami of the Supreme Court of India by way of impeachment. It was alleged that Justice Ramaswamy had spent huge sums of government money on renovation of his official residence. This impeachment motion however failed in the Lok Sabha as the members of the ruling party abstained from voting on the said motion.
Last year the Chief Justice of India recommended to the Prime Minister the Impeachment of Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court for misconduct (it is alleged that prior to his elevation he had appropriated Rs 3.2 million as a court-appointed receiver in 1993). This motion has been moved in the Rajya Sabha and its Chairman has constituted a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal of Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court is sought.
The Right to Information Act and also investigative journalism of the print and the electronic media are proving to be very effective tools in not only curbing corruption but also bringing transparency. Recently, the Central Information Commission, set up under the RTI Act, has even directed the Supreme Court to disclose of the reasons for appointing three judges as Judges of the Supreme Court in supersession of three senior chief justices of High Courts.
For ensuring that the people’s faith in the judiciary is preserved and that the rule of law is not shattered immediate remedial measures need to be undertaken :

a) Set up more Fast Track Courts;
b) Frequent setting of Lok Adalats;
c) Set up an All India Judicial Service similar to that of the Indian Administrative Service;
d) All Courts should use digital technology and be converted into “E-courts” for speedier delivery of justice (India has its first paperless e-court in the High Court of Delhi);

e) The provisions for Summary Trial; Plea Bargaining; Compounding Procedure Code would be utilized more frequently;

f) Setting up of new Courts and appointment of retired honest judges on contractual basis;

g) Shift-working of Courts;
h) Setting-up of more specialized Courts/Tribunals; and
i) Setting-up of Circuit-Benches not only of the State High Courts but also of the Supreme Court of India.

It has also been reported that the Government of India has initiated various measures to introduces reforms in the Judiciary. It has proposed to enact a new law - "The Judges Standards and Accountability Act” - which would make judiciary more accountable. This law would re-assure the people that the Indian Judiciary is above board. Simultaneously, the Indian Government proposes to set up Gram Nyayalayas (Village Courts) under the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 to make justice available to the rural population in their villages.

These and other reforms would ensure speedier justice delivery system and would also reassure the people all over the world that the Indian Judicial System is independent, impartial and also upholds the Rule of Law. Rather, this is the only pillar of the Indian Democracy in which not only all Indians but also all multinational business houses, who are carrying on industrial and business activities in India, have full faith and confidence

----------------------------
Rajiv Khanna is, Professor of Law, University of Delhi, Delhi, India