Judicial system in India as legacy of British Empire

Introduction to Judiciary

While the British left in 1947, one institution remained untouched in spirit, structure, and psychology: the judiciary. Not merely a pillar of democracy, but a vestigial crown—the last surviving outpost of empire.

India decolonized its Parliament. It could never decolonize its Courts i.e. its judicial system. This isn’t a poetic flourish. It is a structural truth, and now—an urgent crisis.

⚖️ The Colonial DNA of the Indian Judiciary

• Language: English-only proceedings ensure 90% of Indians remain legal orphans.
  • Attire: Robes, wigs (once), and “My Lord” rituals mimic imperial courts, not democratic justice.
  • Recruitment: Judges themselves appoint judges through a system called the Collegium—a closed circle with no transparency or public input. India has a written constitution which does not even mention the word “collegium” but it has been created with senior judges of Supreme Court as its members.
  • Power without accountability: They cannot be easily impeached, audited, or even questioned without risking “contempt.” Read about Justice Yashwant Verma controversy below.

This is not a public institution. It is a self-governing aristocracy in black robes.

Ignoring Palpable Corruption

In March 2025, a fire at the Delhi residence of Justice Yashwant Varma led to a major judicial controversy when responders discovered heaps of half-burnt ₹500 notes in a storeroom under his control. Despite video evidence and multiple eyewitness accounts, no formal police complaint was filed. A Supreme Court-appointed panel investigated, calling 55 witnesses and eventually concluding that Varma and his family had covert access to the storeroom, suggesting serious misconduct.

The panel recommended impeachment proceedings, citing a lack of transparency and failure to report the incident. Justice Varma denied all allegations and claimed a conspiracy, but was nonetheless transferred to the Allahabad High Court, stripped of judicial responsibilities. The source of the cash remains unknown, leaving lingering questions about judicial accountability and the limits of institutional oversight.

🔁 Not Rule of Law—But Rule of Judges

India suffers not from the tyranny of precedent—but from its complete abandonment.

• Precedents are fluid. Legal memory is optional.
  • Bench shopping is routine. Outcomes often depend on who hears the case, not what it concerns.
  • Judges routinely overstep, issuing moral rulings on food, films, and private life.

On social media people crying hoarse on different criterion being applied. Hashtag #Judiciary makes trend on social media but no change takes place to improve the situation or to make judicial decision consistant.

This is not jurisprudence. It is judicial adventurism. The robes may be black, but they carry the color of empire.

🧱 The Structural Curse of Judges

India’s judiciary is not comparable to that of Pakistan or Myanmar in outcome—they never had rule of law to begin with. But the structural resemblance is undeniable:

Just as the military is the self-appointing, untouchable force in Pakistan and Myanmar, the judiciary in India has become the military of the mind. I has ventured into all domains of executive governance, not even sparing the sports like cricket.

• Judges, self-appointing judges through the collegium.
  • Immune from prosecution, even in corruption scandals.
  • Untouchable by Parliament, media, or public opinion.
• Unanswerable to any institution of public under the veil of autonomy

From currency-filled residences to deliberate falsehoods in affidavits, judges face no consequence. This is not justice. It is an imperial order in judicial disguise.

📉 Collapse of Basic Justice: Contract Enforcement

India ranks among the worst in the world in enforcing contracts. Thanks only to judiciary.

• India ranked 163rd out of 190 countries in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business (2020).
• Judges go on leave with not even an SMS to litigants but if a litigant fails to turn up due to any emergency, he is required to pay costs which is may not be compensatory but punitive.
• Judiciary requires over 1,400 days (nearly 4 years) to resolve an average commercial dispute. However, it is not uncommon to see litigation prolonging for decades.

This isn’t just inefficiency. It’s the symptom of a judiciary that pursues prestige over service. And the economy pays for it. Public has to suffer in silence.

👑 Aristocracy at the Judicial Benches

The real decay lies in the judiciary’s internal culture. It behaves less like a constitutional body, and more like a hereditary elite, convinced of its own superiority. The result of appointment through collegium system is that every judge is a close blood relative of another judge, present or retired.

1. Misbehavior in Court
   – Judges openly scold, humiliate, and mock litigants and lawyers—especially juniors, alike.
   – Politeness is rare. Arrogance is the norm.
2. Pushback from Lawyers
   – In smaller towns, this has escalated into protests and physical confrontations.
   – Lawyers no longer fear the bench. They resent it. Frequently Bars pass resolutions or go on strike to boycott a particular judge. The circus may be due to a cause but it is disgusting.
3. Collapse of Professional Culture
   – The courtroom is no longer a place of mutual respect—it is a stage for dominance.
   – This is not sustainable. It is already beginning to crack.

The judiciary is no longer feared for its wisdom. It is resisted for its arrogance.

🌐 A Global Pattern: Judiciary and Status Quo

As Subhash Kak, a scientist by profession and settled in USA observes, the judiciary across many nations now acts as the guardian of the global status quo and judiciary of India is no different:

• It obstructs nationalists while preserving old institutional power.
  • It aligns more with globalist elites than with the democratic will of people.
  • It is a counter-majoritarian force, immune to reform, and intolerant of disruption.

India is not isolated in this—only more opaque.

🪦 A Burial, Not a Reformation

This is not a call to reform. This is a call to retire the institution as it currently exists.

What has outlived its dignity,
what defends only itself,
what holds no mirror to the people—
deserves a burial, not fire.

The Robed Raj must end.

Not with slogans. Not with rage. But with clarity, courage, and the creation of a new system grounded in:

• Transparency in appointments
  • Professionalism in conduct
  • Accountability to the public

Until then, India may vote freely, speak freely, even protest freely—

But it will not be ruled justly.
Not until the Robed Raj is named, challenged, and laid to rest.