rewrite this content and keep HTML tags
The Indian judiciary, often considered the backbone of democracy, is in the spotlight more than ever. Questions regarding its independence, impartiality and connection with political ideologies are raising concerns.
From controversial statements by sitting judges to retired judges joining political parties, the blurred lines between justice and politics have sparked intense debate. In this article, we will analyze key cases, judicial decisions and the evolving concept of justice in India.
One such example is that of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court, who attended a VHP event and made remarks that not only sparked controversy but also forced the Supreme Court to seek a detailed clarification.
Adding to the debate, retired judges like Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel have participated in similar events, while others have increasingly moved into political roles after retirement. This raises the question: Are judges truly impartial, or is ideology influencing their decisions?
From denying bail to activists to systemic delays in justice, the judiciary’s processes are often criticized as “punishment in itself”. High-profile cases like the imprisonment of Stan Swamy, Umar Khalid and others highlight these lapses.
Justice should not only be done but should also be seen to be done. Otherwise the public will ask, “Sir, how so?”
