Image credits- lawescort.in
The words socialist , secular and democratic are enshrined in our constitution and we the people of India keep this preamble as the base of all our deeds and duties . So the word democratic signifies that India is a democratic state , which broadly means that we have a government by the people, of the people and for the people. Which signifies that government is made by the people , to work for the people and is accountable to the people for its every action. People have the right to ask questions to the government which results in total transparency and ultimately a better country with a good governance system.
People of the country thrive for justice and stand by the principles of justice. The preamble guarantees to its people Justice, social , economical and political. Imparting of justice is very important for the basic root of any country and the assurance must be present in the minds and heart of its citizens that no matter what justice will be imparted. Hence the concept of judicial accountability is maintained which ensures that the judiciary is accountable to the masses, the judges are able to deliver justice , to decide cases without any fear .
The Legislative, Executive and Judiciary are considered to be the pillars of Indian democratic system . The third branch of the government – Judiciary ,hold an immense power over the people and also ,people and their everyday day to day life is affected by the decisions taken by it . Hence it would not be an exaggeration to say that out of all the three organs of government Judiciary is most connected by the lives of people, affecting it and molding it by its actions . So it is very important that a complete system of transparency is maintained between the judicial system and also with the people so that they can believe and easily approach the court of law for the justice . Hence the concept of judicial accountability is imposed which can be defined as the costs that a judge expects to incur in case his/her behavior and/or his/her decisions deviate too much from a generally recognized standard, in this case referring to the letter of the law.
Article 217(1)  deals with the appointment of judges of the High Court . Article 124(2)4
deals with all powerful by taking an enormous authority . The Indian higher judiciary has immense power over the other organs of the government but there is no proper power to keep a check on the judiciary itself . For a government to run successfully it is important to run a system of checks and balances. Accountability of the judiciary in respect of its judicial functions and orders is safeguarded by provisions for appeal, reversion and review of orders.
Yet there is no disciplinary process for serious judicial misconduct, to punish erring judges. Owing to the possible misuse of power and judicial follies the constitution makers made certain provisions which would help the people and the other two other branches of government to exert some power over the judicial system. In 1982, the matter of appointment of High Court judges came before the Supreme Court in S.P. Gupta v Union of India  in which the majority was of the view that power of appointment of judges reside's in the Central government. Justice Bhagwati also made an observation and commented on the issue. Consequently, the matter once again came up for consideration before a 9 Judge bench in the case of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association v Union of India . Deliberating on the matter, the Court noted that this clause of 'consultation' with the Chief Justice had been implemented on the grounds that the Chief Justice was better qualified to recognize and determine the candidate's worth and suitability for appointment. The Court ruled that ' the opinion of the Chief Justice of India should have the greatest weight in selecting a candidate appropriate for appointment, the selection should be based on a participatory consultative mechanism in which the Executive has the right to serve as a mere check on the right of the Chief Justice. As it can be seen that by all means and the judgments passed the judiciary, seem's to act as its own authority eliminating all the possibilities of any other authority above it, to keep a check on it . Several historic cases with landmark judgments have been registered in this matter such as the case of Justice v. Ramaswami , the case of Justice ashok kumar , Arundhati Roy’s case  and many more of them but still no major change has been registered in this area.
The constitution has laid down Article 124 to deal with these kinds of matter but it is not sufficient and also it lays down an exhausting and lengthy procedure which is not feasible . Time and again several commission reports and committee reports have brought this matter at hand to notice , now it's high time for the government to take some action in regards to this issue and make this country stand true to its values which were laid down by the Constitution makers for the betterment of this country.
Author- Aeshna Raghuwanshi, Content writer, Legal Eagle.