A Cloud Over the Bench: Delhi High Court Orders Internal Inquiry Into Two Judges

In a development that has certainly garnered significant attention within legal circles, the Delhi High Court has taken a rather firm stand, directing its administrative wing to initiate disciplinary proceedings against two district judges. Honestly, it’s a decision that underscores the judiciary’s unwavering commitment to upholding its own integrity, even when facing uncomfortable truths from within.

The individuals at the heart of this unfolding saga are Arul Varma, who served at the time as an additional district judge, and Susheel Bala Dagar, then a principal judge within the family court system. And, as you might imagine, the allegations leveled against them are serious: an alleged showing of undue favour to an accused person in a criminal case, specifically through the granting of bail. But here’s the rub, the detail that truly adds a layer of complexity: the accused in question was, apparently, related to a sitting Supreme Court judge.

It all began, if we trace the threads back, with a rather serious complaint lodged by the Delhi government’s law department sometime in 2018. This complaint pointed fingers at certain actions taken a year prior, in 2017, suggesting a potential breach of judicial conduct. And, let’s be frank, such accusations, particularly when they involve a perceived conflict of interest or external influence, are never taken lightly by the higher echelons of the legal system.

Following the complaint, a thorough inquiry committee was constituted, a standard yet critical step in such matters. This committee diligently delved into the intricacies of the allegations, examining evidence and testimonies to ascertain the veracity of the claims. And now, its report has been submitted, prompting the High Court’s latest directive. The administrative side of the High Court, you see, is now tasked with considering this report and, crucially, moving forward with disciplinary action, should the findings warrant it.

This isn't merely about two individuals; it’s about the broader perception of justice. It’s about reassuring the public that the scales of justice remain balanced, impervious to connections or influence. And, in truth, while such internal investigations can be difficult, even painful, they are absolutely essential. For once, the judiciary is not just delivering justice; it is, in a way, examining its very soul, reinforcing the principle that no one, absolutely no one, is above the law—least of all those sworn to uphold it.