In light of recent developments, the Collegium system and the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014 have once again come under scrutiny. Do you think that a NJAC-like body can make judicial appointments more transparent, broad-based, and accountable? Justify your answer.

And the recent case of corruption by a HC Judge Delhi has raised serious concerns about judicial accountability in India. → opaque recruitment process → collegium system (3rd Judge case) Recent developments and Supreme Courts collegium system: For SC Judge: CJI + 4 Seniourmost Judge of SC HC Judge: CJI + 2 SC senior Judge of SC Citing compelling NJAC amendment. Strike down of 99th CAP 2014 WC 4th Judges Case 2014

NJAC → role in judicial appointments → POSITIVE consequence → (1) Transparency and accountability of appointment process. (2) In line with constitutional mandates under Art 124 of executive role. (3) Ensures neutrality and merit based appointment. (allegation of discriminating appt). (4) Consensus based devision seduce friction between Judiciary and Executive. (5) Exam based appointment minimum - AIS → ensuring trust in institutions. NEGATIVE consequence → (1) Threatens independence of judiciary. (2) Against 96-50 → separation of executive from judiciary. (3) Ensue of law minister is NJAC is unimplemented. (4) Govt majority in NJAC can extrude to divisive. (5) can evade public trust in judiciary.

— RISHUL NEEMA · AIR 267