Key events and developments related to judicial accountability in India.
Mind map illustrating the key aspects and related concepts of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
Key events and developments related to judicial accountability in India.
Mind map illustrating the key aspects and related concepts of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
Constitution of India adopted; Articles 124 & 217 lay the groundwork for judicial appointments and removal.
Judges (Inquiry) Act enacted to provide a mechanism for investigating misconduct of judges.
Ram Swamy case: First impeachment motion against a Supreme Court judge; failed to pass in Parliament.
Impeachment motion against Justice Soumitra Sen of Calcutta High Court; he resigned before the impeachment could be completed.
National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act passed, aiming to change the process of judicial appointments; later struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015.
Impeachment motion against Chief Justice Dipak Misra; rejected by the Rajya Sabha Chairman.
Allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma of Allahabad High Court lead to inquiry committee formation.
Supreme Court upholds Speaker's inquiry panel move against Justice Varma.
Motion in Parliament
Inquiry Committee
Article 124(4)
Article 217
Safeguards for Judges
Accountability Mechanisms
Cumbersome Process
Lack of Success
Constitution of India adopted; Articles 124 & 217 lay the groundwork for judicial appointments and removal.
Judges (Inquiry) Act enacted to provide a mechanism for investigating misconduct of judges.
Ram Swamy case: First impeachment motion against a Supreme Court judge; failed to pass in Parliament.
Impeachment motion against Justice Soumitra Sen of Calcutta High Court; he resigned before the impeachment could be completed.
National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act passed, aiming to change the process of judicial appointments; later struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015.
Impeachment motion against Chief Justice Dipak Misra; rejected by the Rajya Sabha Chairman.
Allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma of Allahabad High Court lead to inquiry committee formation.
Supreme Court upholds Speaker's inquiry panel move against Justice Varma.
Motion in Parliament
Inquiry Committee
Article 124(4)
Article 217
Safeguards for Judges
Accountability Mechanisms
Cumbersome Process
Lack of Success
A motion for presenting an address to the President for the removal of a judge must be supported by at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha.
The Speaker/Chairman may admit the motion or refuse to admit it.
If the motion is admitted, a 3-member committee is constituted to investigate the charges.
The committee consists of: (a) a sitting or retired Judge of the Supreme Court, (b) a Chief Justice of a High Court, and (c) a distinguished jurist.
If the committee finds the judge guilty of misbehavior or incapacity, the motion for removal is taken up in Parliament.
The motion must be passed by a special majority in each House of Parliament (i.e., a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting).
If the motion is passed by both Houses, the President issues an order removing the judge.
The Act aims to ensure a fair and impartial inquiry while safeguarding judicial independence.
The process is quasi-judicial in nature, involving evidence gathering and examination of witnesses.
Key events and developments related to judicial accountability in India.
The need for judicial accountability has been debated since the inception of the Constitution. The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 was enacted to provide a framework for addressing allegations of misconduct against judges, balancing judicial independence with the need for accountability.
Mind map illustrating the key aspects and related concepts of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968
A motion for presenting an address to the President for the removal of a judge must be supported by at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha.
The Speaker/Chairman may admit the motion or refuse to admit it.
If the motion is admitted, a 3-member committee is constituted to investigate the charges.
The committee consists of: (a) a sitting or retired Judge of the Supreme Court, (b) a Chief Justice of a High Court, and (c) a distinguished jurist.
If the committee finds the judge guilty of misbehavior or incapacity, the motion for removal is taken up in Parliament.
The motion must be passed by a special majority in each House of Parliament (i.e., a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting).
If the motion is passed by both Houses, the President issues an order removing the judge.
The Act aims to ensure a fair and impartial inquiry while safeguarding judicial independence.
The process is quasi-judicial in nature, involving evidence gathering and examination of witnesses.
Key events and developments related to judicial accountability in India.
The need for judicial accountability has been debated since the inception of the Constitution. The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 was enacted to provide a framework for addressing allegations of misconduct against judges, balancing judicial independence with the need for accountability.
Mind map illustrating the key aspects and related concepts of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968