New Delhi: The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) on Thursday (March 5) expressed concern over the use of state and privately arranged aircraft for official visits undertaken by the Chief Justice of India and several sitting judges of the Supreme Court of India. In a statement, the group said the arrangements surrounding recent visits to Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh raised questions about judicial propriety and the perception of independence, particularly as both states are frequent litigants before the apex court.

Their statement in full is produced below.

CAMPAIGN FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND REFORMS 

Executive Committee: Prashant Bhushan and Alok Prasanna Kumar (Convenors), Cheryl D’souza (Secretary), Nikhil Dey, Venkatesh Sundaram, Indu Prakash Singh, Anjali Bhardwaj, Amrita Johri, Annie Raja, Beena Pallical, Siddharth Sharma, Devvrat, Indira Unninayar, Vijayan MJ, Vipul Mudgal, Koninika Ray, Prassanna S., Meera Sanghamitra, Apar Gupta, Anurag Tiwary 

———————————— 

Statement on the Use of State Resources for Official Visits by the Chief  Justice of India and Other Supreme Court Judges 

5th March 2026 

CJAR notes with serious concern the recent visits of the Chief Justice of India  and several sitting judges of the Supreme Court of India, to Gujarat and  Andhra Pradesh. The manner in which these visits have been arranged and  publicized, raise concerns regarding judicial independence, institutional  propriety, and compliance with established ethical standards for the conduct  of judges in office.  

It is a matter of record through publicly available information that: 

• A chartered aircraft operated by a private aviation service was used by  judges and their staff for travel from Delhi to Ahmedabad. 
• The Chief Justice thereafter travelled in the aircraft of the Government  of Gujarat from Ahmedabad to Tirupati. 
• The Government of Andhra Pradesh arranged two special aircrafts for  onward travel of six Supreme Court judges and some family members from Tirupati to Vijayawada and from Vijayawada to Delhi. 

We at CJAR raise this concern because both the State of Gujarat and the State  of Andhra Pradesh are frequent and active litigants before the Supreme Court  of India. In such circumstances, if acceptance of state-sponsored transport  and logistical arrangements, beyond lawful entitlements and protocol  measures is indeed true, this raises serious concerns regarding judicial  propriety and independence. Further, the aspect of judges travelling by a  privately chartered aircraft from Delhi to Ahmedabad also gives rise to  potential public perception of 'special privilege', and undue influence or  compromised judicial independence. 

The “Restatement of Values of Judicial Life” adopted by the Supreme Court in  1997 requires judges to maintain high standards of probity and to avoid both  impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities. It states: 

1. "Justice must not only be done but it must also be seen to be done.  The behaviour and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must  reaffirm the people’s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary.  Accordingly, any act of a Judge of the Supreme Court of a High Court, whether in official or personal capacity, which erodes the credibility of  this perception has to be avoided. 

6. A judge should practice a degree of aloofness consistent with the  dignity of his office. 

10. A judge shall not accept gifts or hospitality except from his family, close relations and friends. 

16. Every judge must at all times be conscious that he is under the  public gaze and there should be no act or omission by him which is  unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in  which that office is held.” 

In accordance with this, a judge must avoid situations that might reasonably  give rise to the perception that external influences could affect judicial  conduct or judgment. Acceptance of extravagant and expensive travel facilities  from governments that are litigants before the Court risks undermining public  confidence in this principle. 

CJAR calls upon the concerned State Governments and the Supreme Court  of India to clarify whether the arrangements mentioned above were in the  regular course of protocol for the CJI and judges, and if so, who has borne  the cost for the same. 

CJAR reiterates its position that the judiciary must remain free from any  influence, perceived or real, and retain the confidence of the people in its role  as an impartial guardian of justice.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.