CJI Office Received 8,360 Complaints Against Judges in 10 Years, Govt Tells Lok Sabha
The Union Law Ministry has informed the Lok Sabha that the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) received 8,360 complaints against sitting judges over the last ten years.
The information was shared in Parliament in response to a question raised by DMK Member of Parliament Matheswaran VS. He had sought details about complaints related to corruption, sexual misconduct, or other serious misconduct against judges of the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
What Did the Government Say?
Minister of State for Law and Justice Arjun Ram Meghwal submitted a written reply stating that 8,360 complaints were received between 2016 and 2025, based on data provided by the Supreme Court of India.
However, the response did not clarify whether any action was taken on these complaints. It also did not mention whether proper records were maintained regarding the complaints or their outcome.
Questions on Accountability and Records
The MP had also asked whether the government was aware of any formal mechanism used by the Supreme Court to maintain records or a database of complaints against judges.
In response, the Ministry said that complaints against members of the higher judiciary are handled as per the “in-house procedure.” Under this system, the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justices of High Courts are authorised to receive and deal with complaints.
The Ministry further stated that complaints received through the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS), or by any other means, are forwarded to the CJI or the concerned High Court Chief Justice.
However, no details were provided on how these complaints are recorded, monitored, or resolved.
No Clarity on Future Guidelines
Another important question raised was whether the government plans to introduce guidelines to ensure proper recording, tracking, and accountability in such cases.
The Law Ministry did not respond to this query in its written reply.
The issue has once again brought attention to the transparency and accountability mechanisms governing complaints against members of the higher judiciary.
