Judiciary is Always Under Trial: All Do’s and Don’ts Apply to Judiciary
The Eternal Scrutiny of Justice
In every constitutional democracy, the judiciary stands as the final interpreter of law, the guardian of rights, and the conscience-keeper of the State. Yet, in a profound paradox, the very institution entrusted with judging others is itself perpetually under judgment—by the Constitution of India, by the people, by legal scholarship, and by history.
The proposition that “Judiciary is always under trial” is not a critique—it is a constitutional necessity.
Unlike the executive and legislature, which face periodic accountability through elections or parliamentary oversight, the judiciary is subject to continuous scrutiny. Every judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India or High Courts, every adjournment, every exercise of discretion, and even every silence becomes part of an ongoing institutional trial.
The judiciary does not command the purse or the sword. It commands trust. And trust survives only when the judiciary subjects itself to the strictest standards of do’s and don’ts, more rigorously than any other organ of the State.
I. The Constitutional Paradox: Power Without Direct Accountability
The judiciary wields immense power:
- It can strike down laws
- It can invalidate executive actions
- It can expand or reinterpret fundamental rights
Yet, it is:
- Unelected
- Largely insulated from direct democratic control
This creates a constitutional paradox: immense authority without electoral accountability.
Therefore, legitimacy must be earned daily through:
- Reasoned judgments
- Institutional discipline
- Transparency and fairness
Judicial authority is not enforced—it is accepted. And acceptance depends on credibility.
II. Why Judiciary is “Always Under Trial”
1. Continuous Public Scrutiny
Judicial decisions are not confined to courtrooms. They are examined by:
- Lawyers and litigants
- Academicians
- Media
- Civil society
Every order becomes a public document open to criticism and interpretation.
2. Moral Authority as the Foundation
Courts lack coercive enforcement mechanisms of their own. Their strength lies in:
- Moral legitimacy
- Institutional integrity
If public confidence declines, compliance weakens—turning judicial authority fragile.
3. Constitutional Supremacy
Even the judiciary is subordinate to constitutional principles:
- It must interpret, not legislate
- It must enforce, not dominate
Thus, the judiciary is constantly tested against constitutional morality.
4. History as the Final Appellate Court
Judgments are not final in the moral sense. Over time:
- Celebrated rulings are questioned
- Criticized rulings are vindicated
History acts as the ultimate reviewer of judicial conduct.
III. The Do’s: Standards the Judiciary Must Uphold
1. Impartiality Without Exception
Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. Judges must:
- Avoid bias (actual or perceived)
- Recuse in conflict situations
- Maintain neutrality, especially in politically sensitive cases
Even perceived bias damages institutional credibility.
2. Reasoned and Transparent Judgments
A judgment is a reasoned exercise of power. Courts must:
- Address all arguments
- Provide logical reasoning
- Avoid conclusory or arbitrary orders
A well-reasoned judgment strengthens faith—even when outcomes are unfavorable.
3. Timely Justice
Delay is the judiciary’s greatest structural weakness.
Delays in:
- Civil litigation
- Criminal trials
- Financial disputes (including SARFAESI matters)
lead to:
- Economic loss
- Social injustice
- Erosion of trust
Justice delayed is not merely denied—it is delegitimized.
4. Institutional Integrity
Judicial conduct must reflect:
- Personal honesty
- Financial transparency
- Ethical restraint
The judiciary cannot command integrity unless it embodies it.
5. Respect for Separation of Powers
Judicial restraint is as important as judicial activism. Courts must avoid:
- Policy-making without constitutional necessity
- Administrative interference
- Substituting executive wisdom
Activism must not evolve into overreach.
6. Protection of Fundamental Rights
The judiciary’s highest function is:
- Safeguarding liberty
- Preventing state excess
- Upholding dignity and equality
This is the core justification for its constitutional existence.
IV. The Don’ts: Boundaries the Judiciary Must Not Cross
1. No Arbitrariness
Arbitrariness is the antithesis of rule of law. Courts must avoid:
- Inconsistent reasoning
- Sudden doctrinal shifts without explanation
- Selective application of law
2. No Political Alignment
Courts may decide political issues, but must never become political actors. They must avoid:
- Ideological bias
- Political commentary
- Perceived alignment with regimes
3. No Violation of Natural Justice
Fundamental principles must be strictly followed:
- Audi alteram partem (hear the other side)
- Nemo judex in causa sua (no one should be judge in their own cause)
Procedural fairness is the backbone of legitimacy.
4. No Unjustified Delay
Judicial discipline requires:
- Avoidance of unnecessary adjournments
- Timely pronouncement of reserved judgments
- Efficient case management
Delay reflects institutional inefficiency.
5. No Opacity
Opacity in:
- Judicial appointments
- Bench allocation
- Case listing
creates suspicion. Transparency builds confidence.
6. No Misuse of Contempt Powers
Contempt jurisdiction must:
- Protect dignity of courts
- Not suppress legitimate criticism
A confident judiciary tolerates scrutiny.
V. Judiciary as a Living Institution Under Constant Review
1. Public Perception as the Real Test
Ultimately, the judiciary is judged by:
- The common litigant
- The practicing bar
- Society at large
When courts are seen as:
- Delayed
- Inaccessible
- Biased
the institutional crisis begins.
2. Internal Corrective Mechanisms
The judiciary remains under trial through:
- Appeals
- Reviews
- Larger bench corrections
Self-correction is a sign of strength, not weakness.
3. The Digital Age of Scrutiny
Today:
- Judgments are instantly circulated
- Proceedings are analyzed in real time
- Social media amplifies accountability
Judicial functioning is under continuous public audit.
VI. Special Relevance: Financial and SARFAESI Jurisdiction
In financial litigation and SARFAESI matters:
- Courts balance creditor rights and borrower protections
- Procedural compliance becomes critical
- Even minor judicial lapses can lead to loss of property
Thus, tribunals and courts are under:
- Legal scrutiny
- Economic scrutiny
- Human consequence scrutiny
Here, the judiciary is not just interpreting law—it is deciding livelihoods.
VII. The Ultimate Trial: Conscience and Constitutional Morality
Courts may withstand:
- Public criticism
- Political pressure
But they cannot escape:
- Their own conscience
- Constitutional morality
- Historical judgment
Time remains the final judge of judges.
The Eternal Trial of Justice
The judiciary’s strength lies not in being beyond question, but in being worthy of question and still standing firm.
To say “Judiciary is always under trial” is to acknowledge:
- Its immense responsibility
- Its fragile legitimacy
- Its moral burden
All do’s and don’ts apply to the judiciary with greater force because it is:
- The last refuge of justice
- The final interpreter of rights
- The ultimate guardian of the Constitution
If the judiciary remains just, the Constitution lives.
If it falters, the Constitution becomes a silent text.
The trial never ends. And that is precisely what keeps justice alive.
