During a parliamentary committee meeting, concerns were raised regarding the higher judiciary's adherence to the code of conduct. MPs questioned the lack of action against an Allahabad HC judge despite allegations of financial impropriety.
During a meeting of the parliamentary standing committee on personnel, public grievances, law and justice on Tuesday, several members of Parliament raised concerns about the higher judiciary not following the code of conduct, said people familiar with the matter.
The two-point agenda of the meeting was the code of conduct for the judges of higher judiciary and judges taking up post-retirement assignments.
Several MPs raised the issue of Allahabad HC judge Yashwant Verma, according to the people, asking why no FIR had been registered in the case after cash was found from his residence in Delhi during his tenure as a Delhi High Court judge.
A West Bengal MP gave the example of the termination of 25,753 teachers and teaching staff who had joined the service in 2016, on account of irregularities in appointments, following the SC order. The MP, one of the persons cited earlier said, asked why no action was taken against Justice Verma and why he was just transferred to another high court.
Some members also raised questions on the 'Restatement of Values of Judicial Life'-a 16-point code of conduct for judges which had been adopted by the SC in 1997. The members lamented that the code of conduct existed only on paper.
ADVERTISEMENT
A member also pointed out that despite the parliamentary committee recommending in a report in 2023 that judges declare their assets, it was yet to become the practice.
Members also raised objections to judges participating in events organised by political parties or their affiliates, something that is not allowed as per the code of conduct. This was an indirect reference to Justice Shekhar Yadav of Allahabad High Court who had participated in a Vishva Hindu Parishad event and endorsed the Uniform Civil Code.
According to people in the know, some members raised questions over the kith and kin of judges practising in the same court. A member said that it is often seen that the judge and their near relatives stay in the same house and later attend the same court. He argued that just not being in the same court as the relative shouldn't be enough and that stricter guidelines should be enforced in this regard. In this context, some members suggested that a cooling-off period of at least five years after retirement be introduced for judges.
