For judicial independence, it is essential that judges are able to lead lives with financial dignity: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday stressed the need for judges to lead lives of financial dignity..A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra underlined the importance of enabling judges to live a life of dignity upon retirement, as they spend a significant portion of their working lives in service to the judicial institution."Judicial officers spent the largest part of working life in service of the judicial institution and do not take up benefits which may be available to the other members of Bar and thus State must ensure that judicial officers upon retirement must live a life of dignity," the CJI said..Stressing the link between financial dignity and judicial independence, the CJI asserted that maintaining the public's faith and confidence in the rule of law depends on judges leading lives with a sense of financial dignity."Judicial independence which is necessary to maintain faith and confidence of people in the rule of law can be assured and enhanced so long as judges are able to lead their lives with a sense of financial dignity," the CJI said..The apex court made the remarks while dictating the judgment in the All India Judges Association case dealing with services and allowances to judges. The dictation is expected to be completed on Friday. The Court highlighted the role of the district judiciary in strengthening the rule of law and emphasized the State's duty to ensure that the availability of services, both during service and retirement, aligns with the facilities and emoluments provided to former judicial officers.Further, the Court acknowledged the demanding conditions under which the district judiciary functions, often extending beyond the confines of conventional working hours. It emphasized that judicial work requires preparation before cases are called, as well as the handling of matters after hearings."Hence it is a misnomer to postulate that work of a judge is assessed in terms of performance of duty during court working hours," the Court added.As such, the Court asserted that the State, which is under an affirmative obligation to provide services to judges, could not cite financial burden as a defence in not extending such benefits.