Judge and prejudice: On conduct in judicial proceedings

The Supreme Court of India has issued a strong reprimand to judges for making casual remarks that reflect communal bias or misogyny. This comes in light of recent instances involving a Karnataka High Court judge. It shows the need for accountability and sensitivity within the judicial system, particularly given the live-streaming of court proceedings.

Reprimand for Judges

• Judicial Accountability: The Supreme Court emphasized the necessity for judges to refrain from making casual observations that may reveal personal biases, particularly regarding gender and religion, during court proceedings.
• Suo Motu Cognizance: The Court took suo motu notice of derogatory comments made by Karnataka High Court Judge towards a woman lawyer and previously labeling a locality as ‘Pakistan’, reinforcing the expectation of neutrality and fairness in judicial conduct.
• Impact on Judicial Integrity: Such remarks can tarnish the image of the judiciary and undermine public confidence in the legal system, urging judges to adhere strictly to constitutional values.

Responses and Reactions

• Judge's Apology: Following the Court’s intervention, Judge offered an apology, which the Supreme Court deemed contrite, but it also underscored the need for ongoing scrutiny of judges’ conduct in public settings.
• Advice from Legal Officials: Both the Attorney General and Solicitor General suggested that proceedings be held privately to prevent misrepresentation on social media; however, the CJI countered that transparency is essential, stating, “The answer to sunlight is more sunlight.”
• Previous Warnings: This is not an isolated incident; the Supreme Court had previously warned another judge from the Punjab and Haryana High Court to refrain from making unwarranted remarks, showcasing a pattern of concern regarding judicial comments.

Gender Sensitization in Judiciary

• Combatting Gender Stereotypes: The Supreme Court has previously released a handbook aimed at combating gender stereotypes within the judiciary, providing tools for legal professionals to address and eliminate gender bias in their language and practices.
• Need for Gender Sensitization: The Court highlighted the importance of a gender-sensitive judicial ecosystem, stressing that biases based on gender or religion perpetuate harmful inequalities and hinder the delivery of justice.
• Judiciary’s Role in Society: Judicial officials must maintain awareness of their influence on societal norms and strive to ensure that the justice system operates free from bias, thereby promoting equality and fairness.

Practice Question 

Q. Discuss the implications of communal and gender biases in judicial remarks for the integrity of the Indian legal system. What measures can be implemented to promote gender sensitization and accountability among judges?