Summary
- This article presents a detailed and factual analysis of the opacity, lack of accountability, and internal administrative anomalies deeply entrenched within the Indian judiciary.
- It raises sharp questions on how, under the democratic principle of ‘checks and balances’, the apex court has established itself above the Right to Information (RTI), external investigative agencies, and judicial review.
- From the incident of removing judicial criticisms from NCERT textbooks to the recent, historically critical remarks made by sitting judges of the Madras High Court (May 2026), this article proves that judicial reform has become an indispensable struggle to save Indian democracy.
- The ‘club culture’ in judicial appointments, the mysterious process of selecting lawyers, and the procedural corruption within the registry render this entire system deeply suspicious in the eyes of the public.
Is the Collegium the Core Root of Corruption in the Indian Judiciary?
1. Perspective: The ‘Tell Us the Names’ Refrain and the Double Standards of Suppressing Truth
A concerning and bizarre contradiction is currently visible in the Indian judicial system. On one hand, judges occupying top positions claim institutional purity, but on the other hand, whenever someone points out internal flaws in the system, the entire institution moves to suppress them.
- The Oppressive Example of NCERT Textbooks: When an NCERT political science textbook referenced corruption within the judiciary, pending cases, and administrative anomalies, the leadership of the apex court (Justice Surya Kant) raised severe objections.
- Seizure of Lakhs of Books: Due to this sharp stance by the judiciary, immediate directions were given to remove that chapter, and around 2.50 lakh books were pulled back from the market. At the time, a statement came from the court side: “Tell us who is corrupt, and we will take action.”
Institutional Arrogance: This raises the question: is this stance truly to eradicate corruption, or is it an attempt to keep the rot within the system away from public discourse and the eyes of future generations? When institutions
- cannot tolerate criticism directed at themselves, questions regarding their impartiality naturally arise.
2. The Collegium System: Opacity, Opaque Chambers, and the Web of Nepotism
In no other mature democracy across the world (such as the US, UK, Germany, or France) do judges appoint other judges. India remains the only country where this unique and self-created ‘Collegium system’ is implemented.
- The Lakshman Rekha of RTI and Judicial Review: In a landmark ruling, a Supreme Court bench (including Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar) made it clear that the selection process for High Court and Supreme Court judges and the decisions of the Collegium are entirely outside the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) and judicial review.
- Decisions in the Darkness of Secrecy: This level of opacity in the selection of judges in itself creates the biggest doubt regarding the intent of the system. If this process were entirely fair, merit-based, and transparent, no citizen would need to seek information via RTI. Yet, the Collegium wants to keep its activities strictly confidential, like a ‘secret club’.
- The ‘Mysterious Game’ of Elevating Lawyers: The biggest flaw in the Collegium system appears when, out of lakhs of experienced and senior lawyers in a state High Court, a select 2 or 4 lawyers are suddenly picked for the judge’s chair.
- The Uncle Judges Syndrome: What the actual criteria for this selection were, or what benchmarks of merit were used, remains entirely unknown. The direct outcome of this opacity manifests as nepotism, where the top seats of the judiciary remain dominated by specific families, former judges’ relatives, and connected insiders.
- Why Distance Themselves from Open Exams like UPSC?: Why can’t a transparent, open competitive examination—the ‘All India Judicial Service’ (AIJS)—be conducted through the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for these top posts? The primary reason for avoiding this is that once examination-based selection begins, personal preferences, political bartering, and the veto power of insiders would completely vanish.
3. Procedural and Administrative Corruption: The Registry Game and the Marketplace of Dates Corruption in the judiciary is not limited strictly to cash or financial bribes. Administrative lethality, selective sensitivity, and the misuse of procedures represent a far larger and more lethal form of corruption happening daily at the courtroom doorstep
- The Mysterious Mechanism of the Supreme Court Registry: The role of the registry in deciding which case gets listed before which bench and when has always remained suspicious and controversial. Matters involving high-fee lawyers and major corporate houses get heard overnight or within hours through specially constituted benches, while an ordinary citizen’s appeal remains suppressed for decades under the guise of “defects.”
- Missing Files and Intentional Delays: The sudden disappearance of critical case files from the vault of the highest institution or failing to issue notices to opposing parties (such as the ED or other stakeholders) even after clear bench rulings stands as living proof of institutional corruption.
- Mysterious Silence on Asset Disclosures: Judges who order politicians, bureaucrats, and industrialists across the nation to make every penny of their assets public shy away from publicly disclosing their own movable and immovable assets. This represents a blatant violation of democratic accountability and moral integrity.
4. Building a Safety Shield: The Doctrine of ‘My Lord’ Above the Law
To protect itself from any external legal scrutiny, the judiciary has forged an impenetrable fortress through its own rulings, challenging even the constitutional right to equality (Article 14).
- Restrictions on Filing FIRs: Under older historical judgments of the Supreme Court (such as the K. Veeraswami case), it has been mandated that prior written consent from the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is mandatory even to register an FIR or initiate punitive action against a sitting judge in corruption cases.
- Immunity from Legal Accountability: The practical outcome of this rule is that conducting a swift and fair probe against any judge has been made practically impossible for any central agency (CBI, ED, or police). By the time clearance procedures crawl forward, evidence is often destroyed or cases are quietly shelved. This mechanism remains the single biggest institutional bottleneck to accountability.
5. When ‘Insiders’ Testify: Historic Introspection by High Court Judges
These allegations of systemic rot are no longer raised solely by ordinary citizens, media analysts, or political commentators; honest and courageous judges sitting within the courts themselves are now raising their voices against this suffocation.The Bitter Testimony of the Madras High Court: Recently (on May 21, 2026), a division bench of Madras High Court Justices G.R. Swaminathan and
- Lakshmanan delivered one of the boldest and most serious observations in Indian legal history, stating:
“None can deny there is corruption in judiciary, there were and are corrupt judges.”
- A Challenge to Top Leadership: Now that this testimony comes not from an outsider, but from the bench itself, top leadership and Justice Surya Kant should ask these sitting judges to name those corrupt faces so immediate action can be taken. Remaining silent even after such remarks further erodes institutional credibility.
6. A Cruel Joke on Democracy: The Game of ‘Decade-Long Delays’ in Election Petitions
Delay in justice is injustice in itself, and when such delays pertain to democratic processes, they amount to an assault on the nation’s sovereignty.
- Justice G. Jayachandran’s Sharp Critique: Justice G. Jayachandran of the Madras High Court recently expressed deep concern and anger over the deliberate delays in resolving election petitions. He clearly stated that years of delay in election litigation gives birth to autocracy, posing a severe threat to democracy.
- Chastising the Supreme Court: Justice Jayachandran specifically criticized the Supreme Court, where cases relating to the 2016 assembly elections remained pending until recent years. He termed this “Decade-long delay a ‘grave mockery of justice’ and threat to democracy.” Under Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, election petitions must be decided within a maximum of 6 months. Yet, courts disregard their own rules and parliamentary acts to let illegally elected representatives enjoy full terms in power. If this isn’t legal corruption, what is?
7. Selective Sensitivity: Relief for the Connected, Dates for the Common Man
Another frightening face of the courts appears when legal interpretations shift for prominent politicians, money laundering accused, and influential individuals.
- Special Grace in Specific Cases: The extraordinary legal interpretations spun to grant interim bail to politically influential accused (such as former Delhi Chief Minister Kejriwal and other high-profile figures) and referring the validity of their arrests to large 5-judge benches stuns the common citizen.
- Flaws in Bench Formation: The biggest contradiction is that while the matter gets referred to a larger bench, that bench fails to even form for two whole years. The case remains in cold storage while the accused roams free.
- Leninency for Convicted Criminals: Examples exist where individuals convicted with decades-long sentences (such as the Lalu Yadav case) continue roaming free on bail for years due to poor health or technical grounds, while undertrials rot in jails over petty offenses simply because they lack fees for top lawyers and courts refuse to open their files. Failing to deliver High Court judgments for years and burying files constitutes the greatest institutional corruption.
8. Conclusion: Practice what You Preach, My Lords!
- The judiciary is the final and sacred pillar of society from which every citizen expects fairness, truth, and integrity. The Supreme Court recently issued strict directives to the executive and government to ensure complete transparency and fairness in massive examinations like NEET, which the government implemented diligently.
- However, My Lords, the strict scale you use to measure others’ exams, conduct, and institutions must also be applied to your own appointment process (the Collegium), your registry, and your administrative machinery.
- As long as the judiciary keeps itself above RTI, transparency, financial disclosures, and external independent review under the illusion of being “supreme,” the needle of suspicion will continue to prick the minds of 140 crore Indians regarding claims of being “corruption-free.” The blindfold on the Goddess of Justice is meant for equality before the law—not for shielding insiders or hiding the truth.
🇮🇳Jai Bharat, Vandematram 🇮🇳
Read our previous blogs 👉 Click here
Join us on Arattai 👉 Click here
👉Join Our Channels👈
