UPSC Prelims 2007 Q42: Indian Polity – Judiciary
Consider the following statements:
1. The Judges (Inquiry) Bill, 2006 contemplates establishing a Judicial Council which will receive
complaints against judges of the Supreme Court including the Chief Justice of India, High Court
Chief Justices and Judges.
2. Under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, a woman can file a petition
before a 1st Class Judicial Magistrate.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 2 only
- (c) Both 1 and 2
- (d) Neither 1 nor 2
Answer: (b) 2 only
Explanation
Judges (Inquiry) Bill 2006 and Domestic Violence Act 2005
| Statement | Fact check |
|---|---|
| 1. Judges (Inquiry) Bill 2006 creates a Judicial Council to receive complaints against SC judges, including the CJI | False — the Bill's National Judicial Council mechanism notably excluded the Chief Justice of India from this specific inquiry process, since the CJI would head the Council itself |
| 2. Under the Domestic Violence Act 2005, a woman can file a petition before a 1st Class Judicial Magistrate | True — the Act allows petitions before a Magistrate, including a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class |
Only statement 2 is correct.
Answer: (b) 2 only.
Why each option is right or wrong
- (a) Incorrect. Statement 1 is false — the CJI was excluded from this specific complaints mechanism.
- (b) CORRECT. Only statement 2 (Domestic Violence Act, 1st Class Judicial Magistrate) is correct.
- (c) Incorrect. Statement 1 is false, so both cannot be correct.
- (d) Incorrect. Statement 2 is true, so it isn't "neither".
Key point
The Judges (Inquiry) Bill 2006's Judicial Council excluded the CJI from its own complaints mechanism; the Domestic Violence Act 2005 allows petitions before a 1st Class Judicial Magistrate.
Remember
Judges (Inquiry) Bill 2006 excluded the CJI from its Council's complaints process; Domestic Violence Act 2005 allows petitions before a 1st Class Judicial Magistrate.
Common mistakes
- Assuming the CJI was automatically included in every judicial-accountability mechanism, including this specific Bill's Council.
- Not recognising the structural conflict of the CJI heading a body meant to receive complaints against judges, including potentially against himself.
- Overlooking the precise magistrate level (1st Class Judicial) specified under the Domestic Violence Act.
Exam tip
Judicial-accountability bills often carve out the CJI from being complained against via the same council the CJI chairs — watch for this structural exclusion.
Sources
- Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India — The Judges (Inquiry) Bill, 2006 (as introduced in the Lok Sabha)
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Section 27 (jurisdiction of the Magistrate)