JUSTICE VARMA IMPEACHMENT
Context
- In June 2025, Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju announced the government’s plan to seek support from all political parties for an impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Varma.
- Justice Varma, a judge of the Allahabad High Court, is accused of corruption.
- The corruption charges were upheld by a Supreme Court-appointed committee.
- The government intends the impeachment process to be bipartisan and non-political.
- The goal is to initiate the impeachment motion during the Monsoon Session of Parliament (July 21 to August 12, 2025).
GOVERNMENT’S PUSH
- Who: Justice Yashwant Varma, formerly at Delhi High Court, currently Allahabad High Court.
- Why: Found guilty of corruption through an independent SC-appointed inquiry committee.
- Government Stance:
- Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju emphasized that corruption in the judiciary transcends political divisions.
- Calls for a united parliamentary approach.
- Engaged in talks with major and smaller political parties to secure consensus.
- Significance: A rare and serious step reinforcing the message that judiciary integrity is paramount.
IMPEACHMENT MOTION UNDER JUDGES (ENQUIRY) ACT, 1968
Initiation of Motion
- A motion to remove a judge can be introduced in either House of Parliament.
- Requires support of at least:
- 100 Lok Sabha members or
- 50 Rajya Sabha
- The Speaker (Lok Sabha) or Chairman (Rajya Sabha) decides whether to admit the motion based on preliminary scrutiny.
Formation of Inquiry Committee
- Upon admission of motion, a three-member committee is formed by the Speaker/Chairman to investigate allegations.
- The committee consists of:
- Chief Justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge,
- Chief Justice of one of the High Courts,
- A distinguished jurist (a reputed legal expert).
- The committee investigates charges, records evidence, and examines witnesses.
Committee Report and Parliamentary Debate
- The committee submits its findings to the presiding officer.
- If the committee finds the judge guilty, the motion for removal is debated in both Houses.
- The motion requires a special majority for approval:
- Majority of total membership of the House, and
- At least two-thirds of the members present and voting.
Presidential Approval and Removal
- Once both Houses pass the impeachment motion, it is presented to the President.
- The President orders removal of the judge accordingly.
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN JUSTICE VARMA’S CASE
- An in-house committee (internal SC inquiry led by then CJI Sanjiv Khanna) had already investigated Justice Varma and submitted a report.
- This differs from usual cases where the parliamentary committee investigates from scratch.
- The government is deliberating how to incorporate this existing report into the formal impeachment inquiry.
- The Speaker of Lok Sabha will decide the procedural aspects.
- Minister Rijiju called the reconciliation of reports a secondary issue compared to the goal of moving the motion swiftly.
- The government aims to complete the impeachment process during the upcoming Monsoon Session.
BACKGROUND & FACTS OF THE CASE
- In March 2025, a fire incident at Justice Varma’s residence in Delhi revealed burnt sacks containing cash in an outhouse.
- Justice Varma denied knowledge of the cash.
- A Supreme Court-appointed committee conducted an inquiry, recording witness statements and Justice Varma’s responses.
- The committee found Justice Varma guilty of corruption.
- CJI Sanjiv Khanna reportedly asked Justice Varma to resign, but he refused.
- Consequently, Justice Varma was transferred to the Allahabad High Court but has not been assigned any judicial duties there.
- CJI Khanna also wrote to the President and Prime Minister recommending impeachment, the constitutional mechanism for removing High Court judges.
CONSTITUTIONAL & LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF JUDICIAL IMPEACHMENT
A. Constitutional Provisions
- Article 124(4) of the Constitution: Applies to removal of Supreme Court judges.
- Article 218: Extends same procedure to High Court judges.
- Grounds for removal are restricted to:
- Proved misbehaviour, or
- Incapacity (physical or mental inability to perform judicial duties).
B. Importance of the Process
- Ensures judicial accountability while maintaining judicial independence.
- Acts as a check against misconduct without allowing frivolous or politically motivated removals.
Step | Details |
Initiation of motion | Requires support of 100 Lok Sabha or 50 Rajya Sabha members |
Admission of motion | Decided by Speaker/Chairman |
Inquiry Committee formation | CJI or SC judge + Chief Justice of HC + distinguished jurist |
Committee investigation | Gather evidence, examine witnesses |
Report submission | To the presiding officer |
Parliamentary debate | Motion debated and voted on in both Houses |
Special majority required | Majority of total members + 2/3 of present and voting members |
Presidential sanction | Final removal ordered by President |
CHECKS & BALANCES IN IMPEACHMENT PROCESS
- High thresholds for motion admission and voting prevent misuse.
- Expert inquiry committee ensures fairness and objectivity.
- Bicameral parliamentary involvement strengthens democratic scrutiny.
- Ensures removal only in serious proven cases.
HISTORICAL INSTANCES OF IMPEACHMENT ATTEMPTS
Judge | Year | Allegations | Outcome |
Justice V. Ramaswami | 1993 | Corruption and misconduct | Impeachment motion failed |
Justice Soumitra Sen | 2011 | Misbehaviour | Resigned before motion vote |
Justice Dipak Misra | 2018 | Alleged misbehaviour | Motion rejected by Speaker |
GUIDELINES ON JUDGES PUBLIC STATEMENT & CONDUCT
- Judges have freedom of speech (Article 19(1)(a)) but with restrictions to:
- Preserve judicial dignity,
- Avoid bias or partiality,
- Maintain public confidence in the judiciary.
- Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002) and Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997):
- Stress impartiality, integrity, propriety, and independence.
- Judges must avoid:
- Public comments on ongoing cases,
- Political or partisan statements,
- Participation in controversial forums/events.
- The Supreme Court has taken a stern view of judges who violate these norms (e.g., Justice C.S. Karnan case).
Note: Connect with Vajirao & Reddy Institute to keep yourself updated with latest UPSC Current Affairs in English.
Note: We upload Current Affairs Except Sunday.