Reports Surface of Judicial Corruption Allegations Amidst Judge Transfers and Removal Proceedings

Reports Surface of Judicial Corruption Allegations Amidst Judge Transfers and Removal Proceedings

The report alleges that the judiciary “works as a mafia gang which does not hold thorough investigations in the crimes of judges who enjoy full impunity”.

RMN News Legal Desk
May 24, 2025

NEW DELHI – Recent events have brought renewed focus on allegations of judicial corruption in India, including the transfer of a Special Judge in Delhi and a reported recommendation for the removal of a Delhi High Court Judge. These developments coincide with findings from a research report claiming rampant judicial corruption in the country.

A Special Judge (PC Act) posted at Rouse Avenue Court was transferred to Rohini (North-West Delhi) days after the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) registered a bribery case against his ahlmad (record keeper), Mukesh Kumar. The ACB booked Kumar under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) on May 16, accusing him of demanding and accepting bribes from accused persons to facilitate their bail.

However, according to reports, Kumar has vehemently denied the charges, asserting he has been falsely implicated by ACB officers as part of a broader conspiracy aimed at targeting the judge. In a petition before the Delhi High Court, Kumar accused ACB Joint Commissioner Madhur Verma and Assistant Commissioner of Police Jarnail Singh of attempting to settle personal scores with the judge over judicial orders that went against the agency. Kumar stated the FIR was “a false and malicious FIR registered… with the sole objective of arm-twisting the judiciary and using the petitioner as a tool to threaten the judge“.

[ Also Read: How Criminals Abuse the Legal System in India to Attack Press Freedom ]

The petition further alleged that following the judge’s repeated criticism of flaws in ACB investigations, members of the court staff began receiving threats of being framed in false cases. Kumar claimed that, under pressure, he had even requested a transfer from the special judge’s courtroom. He has sought either the quashing of the FIR or a transfer of the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The Delhi High Court directed the State to file a status report or response by May 29.

Kumar also informed a trial court that the FIR was registered shortly after the Special Judge, with whom he was posted, issued a show-cause notice to Joint Commissioner Verma, asking why a contempt reference should not be initiated against him before the High Court.

Notably, before the FIR was registered, the ACB had written to the Law Secretary of the Delhi government in January seeking permission to initiate an inquiry against the judge. The agency also submitted what it claimed was incriminating material against both the judge and Kumar to the High Court on its administrative side. In February, the Delhi High Court responded that the agency was free to investigate the complaints but declined to permit any action against the judge at that stage due to lack of sufficient material, stating that “presently there is no requirement to grant permission qua the said Judicial Officer”.

In a separate development, the Chief Justice of India has reportedly recommended initiating proceedings for the removal of Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Verma. This follows a report from a three-member panel investigating allegations related to a significant amount of cash found at his residence.

These incidents occur against the backdrop of a research report titled “India Judicial Research Report 2024: Decline of the Indian Judiciary,” which reveals what it describes as “rampant judicial corruption in India.”. According to the report, corruption is a major bottleneck impeding the functioning of Indian courts, and while the Supreme Court’s “State of the Judiciary” report analyzed various factors for inefficiency, it did not consider judicial corruption, which the research report claims is mainly responsible for the poor state of the judiciary.

The report highlights that numerous reports of corruption in the Indian judiciary exist, but “most corruption cases have been brushed under the carpet”. It notes that while it is difficult to directly prove the payment of bribes to judges, there is enough circumstantial evidence that can be drawn from their conduct and judgments. However, according to the report, the vigilance committees of courts often do not follow fundamental principles of evidence and acquit accused judges, sometimes without proper investigation.

The report alleges that the judiciary “works as a mafia gang which does not hold thorough investigations in the crimes of judges who enjoy full impunity”. It further suggests that most members of the judiciary, journalists, and activists fear reprisal from judges who misuse their authority.