Justice Chandrachud while dismissing the appeal against the Delhi HC Judgment penning down his spearte but concurring opinion held that office of CJI is under purview of RTI Act. While this he also said that the basis for the selection and appointment of judges to the higher judiciary must be defined and plced in the public realm.
Justice Chandrachud further added that this would promote confidence in the apoointment process which wil foster a degree of transparency and promote accountability in decision making at all levels within the judiciary and the government.
There were various observations made by the Jutsice Chandrachud namely:
Justice Chandrachud while noticing the entire proceedings ahad made several observations wherein:
“Adjudicators in robes are human and may be pre-disposed to the failings that are inherently human. But the law demands that they must aspire to a standard of behaviour that does not condone those failings of a human persona in the discharge of judicial duties.”
Therefore, according to Justice Chndrachud to use Judicial independence as aa plea to refuse accountability is fallacious. Independence is secured by accountability. Hence, transparency and scrutiny are instruments to secure accountability. So, we are right in saying on the crux Judicial independence is not a shield to protect wrong and also it is not a carte blanche to arbitrary behaviour. This has to be considered apar and while giving this judgment Justice Chandrachud had made several observations, the detailed study of which can be found in the judgment attached herewith.