Context: The Chief Justice of India (CJI) has initiated a three-member in-house inquiry into the conduct of Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, following allegations of currency notes found in his official residence where a fire broke out.
Relevance of the topic :Prelims : In-house Inquiry process, Removal of Judges under the Constitution.
Removal of Judges under the Constitution
- Indian Constitution has the provisions for the removal of judges:
- Article 124(4): Removal of a Supreme Court (SC) judge.
- Article 218: Removal of a High Court (HC) judge.
- The judge can only be removed by Parliament on two grounds:
- Proven misbehavior or incapacity.
- Proven misbehavior and incapacity are not defined in the Constitution.
- The impeachment process requires a motion to be passed in both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha with at least two-thirds of those present and voting, in such a way that it is more than 50% of the total membership of each House. (special majority)
- If Parliament approves, the President issues the final removal order. However, no SC Judge has been impeached so far.
Judiciary’s In-House Inquiry:
- The inquiry is being conducted by a three-member committee consisting of:
- Chief Justice (Punjab & Haryana HC)
- Chief Justice (Himachal Pradesh HC)
- Justice (Karnataka HC)
- This demonstrates the importance of the Supreme Court’s in-house procedure in addressing judicial misconduct without requiring impeachment.
Need for an In-House Inquiry Mechanism:
- 1995: Supreme Court, in ‘Ravichandran Iyer vs. Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee case’ noted a gap between proven misbehavior warranting impeachment and conduct inconsistent with the judicial office.
- 1997: The SC constituted a five-member committee which devised an internal procedure for handling allegations of misconduct against judges.
- 1999: The recommendations were adopted by SC. This procedure allowed the CJI or the Chief Justice of HC to initiate an inquiry against a judge if serious allegations were made, providing an alternative to impeachment.
Step-by-Step Process of the In-House Procedure for Judges
| Step | Description |
| Complaint Received | • A complaint against a judge can be received by the Chief Justice of a High Court (HC), Chief Justice of India (CJI), or President of India. • If the complaint is received by the Chief Justice of HC or the President, it is forwarded to the CJI for further examination. |
| Scrutiny by CJI | • CJI reviews the complaint. If found to be baseless, it can be dismissed at this stage. • If needed, the CJI can request a preliminary report from the concerned HC Chief Justice to assess the validity of the complaint. |
| Formation of Inquiry Committee and Committee Investigation | • If a detailed probe is required, the CJI constitutes a three-member inquiry committee, consisting of two HC Chief Justices and one HC judge. • The committee conducts an investigation while ensuring natural justice, which includes allowing the accused judge to present their defence. |
| Submission of Inquiry Report | • After completing the inquiry, the committee submits its report to the CJI. • The report must clarify: i) whether the allegations have any substance. ii). if the allegations are serious enough to warrant removal proceedings. |
| Possible Outcomes | Based on the report, the CJI takes further action:i) If the allegations lack substance, the case is closed.ii) If the misconduct is minor, the CJI may "advise" the judge, and the report is placed on record.iii) If the misconduct is serious, the judge is asked to resign or retire. |
| Refusal to Resign | If the judge refuses to step down, the CJI instructs the HC Chief Justice not to assign any judicial work to the judge. |
| Further Action (If Needed) | If necessary, the matter may escalate toward formal impeachment under constitutional provisions. |
Also Read: Removal process of a Judge of High Court