All 33 sitting judges of the Supreme Court have unanimously agreed to disclose their assets publicly by publishing the details on the apex court’s official website, marking a significant move towards greater transparency in the Indian judiciary. The decision, taken at a full court meeting on April 1, marks a major shift from the existing practice, where asset declarations remained a matter of judges’ discretion.
The resolution, which applies to both current and future judges, comes against the backdrop of growing concerns over opacity in the judiciary. The need for greater accountability has been underscored by recent controversies, most notably the alleged discovery of a large sum of cash at the residence of justice Yashwant Varma last month, while he served as a judge in the Delhi high court. Justice Varma is currently facing an in-house inquiry and has been moved to his parent high court at Allahabad. The Supreme Court’s decision to mandate public disclosure is seen as a step towards restoring public confidence in judicial integrity.
The debate over judicial asset disclosure has spanned decades. In 1997, the Supreme Court adopted a resolution known as “The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life,” which required every judge of the Supreme Court to declare their assets and liabilities to the Chief Justice of India (CJI). High court judges are supposed to submit the details of their assets to the chief justices of their high courts. This declaration was to be made upon appointment and updated annually. However, this internal mechanism did not extend to public disclosure.
In 2009, in response to public scrutiny, the full bench of the Supreme Court resolved to allow voluntary disclosure of judges’ assets. Subsequently, on September 8, 2009, the Supreme Court clarified that while judges were encouraged to declare their assets publicly, it would not be mandatory. Even today, the Supreme Court website states that asset disclosure remains voluntary, with 30 out of 33 judges having submitted their declarations.
Also Read: State changes returning officer after SC stay, paves way for MMC polls
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, enacted in 2005, intensified debates on judicial transparency. While RTI allows citizens to seek information from public authorities, Section 8(1)(j) of the Act exempts disclosure of personal information unless it serves a larger public interest. This provision has been frequently invoked to deny access to judicial asset declarations.
One of the most significant legal battles on this issue was initiated by activist Subhash Chandra Agarwal, who filed an RTI application in 2009 seeking disclosure of Supreme Court judges’ asset declarations. The Central Information Commission (CIC) directed the Supreme Court to furnish information, but the judiciary resisted, citing privacy concerns.
In 2010, the Supreme Court, in Secretary General, Supreme Court of India Vs Subhash Chandra Agarwal, upheld that while judges must declare their assets to the CJI, such information would not be publicly disclosed unless there was a compelling public interest. This principle was reaffirmed in 2019 when a five-judge Constitution bench ruled that asset details could remain confidential unless public interest warranted their disclosure.
Despite previous court rulings maintaining confidentiality, the issue of judicial asset disclosure has remained contentious. The lack of mandatory public disclosure has drawn criticism, particularly in comparison to elected representatives and bureaucrats, who are required by law to make their asset declarations public. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice, in its 2023 report on judicial accountability, recommended mandatory public declarations by judges, but no legislative action followed. In November 2024, the government informed Rajya Sabha that there is no plan to make asset declaration mandatory for judges of the Supreme Court and high courts.
The government recently responded to a query in the Rajya Sabha by RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha regarding mandatory asset declaration for judges. Minister of State for Law and Justice, Arjun Ram Meghwal, on March 27 stated that the Supreme Court had examined the issue through a committee of judges, which concluded that the current system of voluntary disclosure aligns with judicial precedent. The committee referenced the 2019 Constitution bench judgment, which upheld the confidentiality of judicial asset declarations unless public interest demands disclosure. The committee reaffirmed the existing practice, requiring judges to declare their assets to the CJI upon assuming office and upon any substantial acquisition, with the names of compliant judges displayed on the court’s website.
Further, the government clarified that while the Parliamentary Committee on Law and Justice had in 2023 recommended mandatory asset declaration for judges, no statutory rules have been framed under the High Court Judges Act, 1954, and the Supreme Court Judges Act, 1958, to enforce such a requirement. The responsibility for maintaining records of asset declarations lies with the judiciary, and no central repository of such data exists, it added.