Supreme Court's 1991 Verdict on Judicial Immunity Under Scrutiny

The Supreme Court has highlighted its 1991 verdict that grants virtual immunity to judges in criminal cases, making it clear that such cases cannot be registered without consulting the Chief Justice of India. This comes amid ongoing investigations into allegations against Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma.

The Supreme Court's recent rejection of a plea to file an FIR concerning the alleged discovery of burnt cash at the residence of Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma has spotlighted a significant 1991 verdict. This verdict grants virtual immunity to judges, requiring consultation with the Chief Justice of India before any criminal case against a judge can be initiated.

In the landmark K Veeraswami v. Union of India case, a five-judge Constitution bench ruled that no criminal case should be registered against a high court or Supreme Court judge unless the Chief Justice of India is consulted. The verdict emphasizes due regard for the Chief Justice's opinion unless allegations target the CJI, in which case other judges are consulted.

The ruling follows previous court instructions on dealing with judicial misconduct allegations and in-house procedures. These steps involve a two-stage probe to ensure fairness and absence of bias, potentially leading to the removal of a judge if misconduct is severe.

(With inputs from agencies.)