Uttarakhand High Court Vigilance Cell Logs 258 Complaints Against Subordinate Judges
In a significant disclosure under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the vigilance cell of the Uttarakhand High Court has reported receiving a total of 258 complaints against judges and judicial officers of the state's subordinate judiciary between January 2020 and April 2025. According to information provided by the court's public information officer (PIO), disciplinary or criminal action was initiated against four officers during this period.
RTI Battle Leads to Transparency Breakthrough
The data was revealed in response to an RTI application filed by Indian Forest Service officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi, following the intervention of Uttarakhand's Chief Information Commissioner Radha Raturi. Last month, the State Information Commission directed the High Court PIO to furnish the information after obtaining approval from the competent authority, marking a pivotal moment in judicial transparency.
Chaturvedi had originally sought the details in May 2023, requesting specifics on the authority competent to handle corruption or misconduct complaints against subordinate judges, the total number of complaints filed from January 2020 to April 2025, and the number of cases where action was recommended or initiated. However, his application was initially denied on grounds of confidentiality and third-party concerns.
Legal Proceedings and Commission's Ruling
In June 2023, the PIO responded without providing complete information, and Chaturvedi's appeal before the First Appellate Authority also proved unsuccessful. During a hearing at the State Information Commission, the PIO maintained that the information was confidential and involved third parties, but conceded that aggregate details could be shared with approval from the Chief Justice.
After hearing both sides, the commission ruled that the aggregate number of complaints should be disclosed after due approval and directed the High Court to report compliance. This decision paved the way for the release of the data, highlighting a commitment to accountability in the judiciary.
Reactions and National Context
Reacting to the disclosure, Sudarshan Goyal, counsel for Sanjiv Chaturvedi, stated, The move marked a significant step towards transparency and accountability in the administration of justice. He further noted that other High Courts, including those in Chhattisgarh, Delhi, and Chennai, had declined to share similar information, suggesting that Uttarakhand HC was perhaps the first in the country to do so.
This development underscores ongoing efforts to enhance judicial oversight and public trust in legal systems across India, setting a potential precedent for other states to follow in promoting openness within the judiciary.
