SC Considers Rajya Sabha's Role in Justice Varma Case

Supreme Court examines Rajya Sabha's role in Justice Varma's removal case.

The Supreme Court is considering whether the motion to remove Justice Yashwant Varma can be presented to the new Rajya Sabha Chairman, C.P. Radhakrishnan. This comes as the court reserved its judgment on Justice Varma's challenge to the inquiry committee established by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to investigate allegations of burnt currency found at his residence in March.

The court noted no procedural irregularities in the committee's quorum, comprising a Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice, and a jurist. Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta stated he would agree to the suggestion of approaching the RS Chair if the Bench proposed it. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Justice Varma, argued that separate notices of the removal motion were given to both the then RS Chairman, Jagdeep Dhankhar, and the LS Speaker on July 21, 2025.

Dhankhar resigned the same day, and the notice was rejected by the Deputy Chairman on August 11. Birla admitted the notice and formed the inquiry committee the next day.

Key Facts

Case: Removal motion of Justice Yashwant Varma

Court: Supreme Court

Issue: Inquiry committee by Lok Sabha Speaker

Date: July 21, 2025 - Notices given to RS and LS

Argument: Notices given in co-equal Houses

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II: Polity and Governance - Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary

GS Paper II: Parliament and State Legislatures – structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers & privileges and issues arising out of these

Potential question types: Statement-based, analytical questions on judicial accountability and independence

Visual Insights

Procedure for Removal of a Judge

This flowchart outlines the steps involved in the removal of a judge of the Supreme Court or High Court, as per the Constitution and relevant Acts. The current case involving Justice Varma highlights the complexities of this process.

1.Motion for removal introduced in either Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha
2.Speaker/Chairman admits or rejects the motion
3.If admitted, a 3-member inquiry committee is formed (SC Judge, HC Chief Justice, Jurist)
4.Inquiry committee investigates the charges
5.Committee submits its report
6.If the committee finds the judge guilty, each House of Parliament votes on the motion with a special majority (2/3rd present & voting and majority of total membership)
7.If passed by both Houses, the President issues an order removing the judge

More Information

Background

The process of removing a judge of the High Court or Supreme Court in India is a complex one, rooted in constitutional provisions and parliamentary procedures. While the Constitution outlines the grounds for removal (proven misbehavior or incapacity), the actual mechanism has evolved through interpretations and precedents. The Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968 provides the framework for investigating allegations against judges.

Prior to this Act, the process was less defined, leading to debates about fairness and transparency. The first attempt to impeach a judge in India was against Justice V. Ramaswami in the early 1990s, highlighting the challenges and political dimensions involved in such proceedings.

This case underscored the need for a robust and impartial inquiry process to maintain the judiciary's independence and public trust.

Latest Developments

Recent years have seen increased scrutiny of the judiciary, with debates surrounding judicial appointments, transparency, and accountability. The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), though struck down by the Supreme Court, reflects the ongoing tension between judicial independence and executive involvement in judicial appointments. There's also been growing discussion about the need for internal mechanisms within the judiciary to address complaints against judges, promoting self-regulation and maintaining public confidence.

Furthermore, the use of technology and digitization in court proceedings is transforming the judicial landscape, potentially impacting the efficiency and accessibility of justice. The Justice Varma case, in this context, highlights the complexities of balancing judicial accountability with the protection of judicial independence.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the removal of a High Court judge in India: 1. A motion for removal must be supported by a special majority in both Houses of Parliament. 2. The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 provides the framework for investigating allegations against judges. 3. The President of India has the power to directly remove a judge based on allegations of misconduct. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: A

Statement 1 is correct as a special majority (2/3rd of members present and voting and a majority of the total membership of the House) is required in both houses. Statement 2 is correct as the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 provides the framework. Statement 3 is incorrect as the President can only remove a judge after an address by both Houses of Parliament.

2. In the context of the removal process of a High Court judge, what constitutes 'proven misbehavior' as a ground for removal?

A.Any action deemed inappropriate by the President.
B.Actions that violate the code of conduct for judges as determined by the Supreme Court.
C.A subjective assessment based on public opinion.
D.It is not clearly defined in the Constitution or relevant statutes, leaving it open to interpretation by Parliament.

Show Answer

Answer: D

The term 'proven misbehavior' is not explicitly defined, leading to interpretation by Parliament during the impeachment process. This ambiguity can lead to debates about the scope and application of this ground for removal.

3. Which of the following statements is NOT correct regarding the role of the Rajya Sabha in the removal of a High Court judge?

A.The Rajya Sabha can initiate the removal process independently of the Lok Sabha.
B.The Chairman of the Rajya Sabha can admit or reject a motion for removal.
C.The Rajya Sabha must pass a resolution for removal with a simple majority.
D.The Rajya Sabha participates in the inquiry process if the motion is admitted.

Show Answer

Answer: C

The Rajya Sabha, like the Lok Sabha, must pass a resolution for removal with a special majority (2/3rd of members present and voting and a majority of the total membership of the House), not a simple majority.