Judiciary cannot be beyond scrutiny, criticism necessary for accountability: CJI Surya Kant - Bar and Bench

**Chief Justice of India Surya Kant Stresses Need for Open Scrutiny of the Judiciary**

In a keynote address delivered at the 6th Ram Jethmalī Memorial Lecture, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant warned that the Indian judiciary cannot afford to insulate itself from public examination. Citing recent controversies that have shaken public confidence, he argued that “the judiciary cannot be beyond scrutiny; criticism is necessary for accountability.” The remarks echoed a similar sentiment expressed in a recent editorial in *The Hindu*, which highlighted the danger of a self‑protective bench that seeks to “earn public trust by shielding itself from scrutiny.” According to the CJI, transparent processes, timely disclosures of judges’ assets, and an independent mechanism for addressing complaints are essential to restore faith in the justice system.

The lecture also revived the legacy of the late lawyer‑politician Ram Jethmalī, whose own crusade against corruption and misuse of power inspired many of today’s calls for reform. In a related piece, *The Times of India* recalled Jethmalī’s persistent questioning of why a First Information Report (FIR) was never filed against former police officer S. Varma, a case that many view as emblematic of institutional inertia. *ThePrint* further highlighted Jethmalī’s warnings about “fixer lawyers” who allegedly act as intermediaries in manipulating judicial outcomes, urging the bar and the bench to take decisive action against such malpractice. By invoking Jethmalī’s spirit, CJI Surya Kant underscored that the judiciary must not only be independent but also answerable to the people it serves.

The CJI’s call for openness arrives as the Supreme Court grapples with a backlog of cases and increasing public scrutiny over high‑profile judgments. While the judiciary has taken steps—such as the recent adoption of a digital case‑management system and the establishment of a judicial accountability committee—critics argue that more robust reforms are needed to curb alleged “fixer” influence and ensure swift justice. Observers note that the CJI’s remarks could pave the way for legislative or constitutional amendments aimed at strengthening oversight mechanisms, a move that may reshape the balance between judicial independence and accountability in India’s democratic framework.