Education

Law And Constitution

Judiciary is Always Under Trial: All Do’s and Don’ts Apply to Judiciary

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 <a title="External website that opens in new window" href="https://energy.vikaspedia.in/viewcontent/energy/policy-support/others?lgn=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-page-id="2183">others</a> 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. 
Contributed By: Ajay Gautam Advocate

/education/law-and-constitution/judiciary-is-always-under-trial-all-do’s-and-don’ts-apply-to-judiciary