Judge’s Undisclosed Ties to Prosecutor Spark Outrage in Death Row Cases
A senior judge overseeing two high-profile death penalty cases in India failed to reveal personal connections to the lead prosecutor, triggering a judicial ethics scandal. Legal experts warn the undisclosed relationship could compromise the verdicts, reigniting debates over fairness in capital punishment trials.
Details of the Controversial Cases
The two cases involve:
1. 2015 Maharashtra Double Murder – A robbery-related conviction where the accused was sentenced to death.
2. 2018 Uttar Pradesh Bomb Blast – A terrorist attack case resulting in multiple deaths and a death sentence.
Justice Rameshwar Malhotra (name changed) presided over both appeals, despite reportedly maintaining a close friendship with prosecutor Advocate Karan Saxena. Investigations reveal the two were law school classmates and attended family gatherings, yet no formal disclosure was made.
Violation of Judicial Ethics
Indian judicial guidelines require judges to recuse themselves from cases with potential conflicts. Legal experts argue:
– The lack of transparency undermines public trust.
– Unconscious bias may have influenced sentencing.
– Death penalty cases demand the highest scrutiny.
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan stated:
“This violates natural justice. Personal ties between judges and prosecutors erode faith in verdicts—especially in life-or-death rulings.”
Calls for Retrials and Systemic Reforms
Human rights groups and the convicts’ families demand retrials, citing breaches of Article 21 (Right to Fair Trial). The scandal mirrors past cases where undisclosed ties led to overturned convictions.
Advocates propose key reforms:
✅ Mandatory conflict-of-interest disclosures
✅ Stricter recusal rules for judges
✅ Independent judicial oversight body
What’s Next?
The Supreme Court may intervene, potentially ordering retrials. Meanwhile, the case exposes gaps in India’s judicial accountability—prompting calls for systemic changes to prevent future lapses.
Follow for updates.
