SC weighs Rajya Sabha Chair role in Justice Varma case

UPSC Prelims + Mains Study Note

1. At a Glance

2. Why in the News

3. Background & Evolution

Constitutional & Statutory Framework: - Article 124(4): Provides for removal of a Supreme Court judge by Presidential order after a motion adopted by both Houses. [S3] - Article 218: Extends the same procedure to High Court judges. [S3] - Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968: Elaborates the removal procedure; under Section 3(2), the Speaker or Chairman constitutes a three-member inquiry committee upon admission of a motion. [S3]

Key Milestones: | Year | Event | |------|-------| | 1968 | Judges (Inquiry) Act enacted | | 1993 | In-house procedure for judge accountability established by SC itself | | 2011 | Justice Soumitra Sen (Calcutta HC) — first judge to face impeachment motion in RS (resigned before vote) | | 2018 | Justice C.S. Karnan (Calcutta HC) — convicted of contempt by SC collegium; resigned | | 2025 | Justice Yashwant Varma case — currency notes found; in-house inquiry initiated | | 2025 | Impeachment motions in both Houses; RS motion declared defective | | 2026 | SC upholds LS Speaker's authority to form inquiry panel |

No judge has ever been successfully removed through the constitutional impeachment process in India's history. [S3]

4. Core Static Facts

Constitutional Provisions: - Article 124(4): Removal of SC judge — grounds: proven misbehaviour or incapacity; Presidential order required after Parliament motion. [S3] - Article 218: Applies same procedure to High Court judges. [S3] - The word "impeachment" does not appear in the Constitution; it is colloquial usage. [S3]

Procedural Requirements (Judges Inquiry Act, 1968): - Motion must be signed by: ≥100 Lok Sabha members OR ≥50 Rajya Sabha members. [S3] - Inquiry committee composition: (i) a Supreme Court judge, (ii) a Chief Justice of a High Court, (iii) a distinguished jurist. [S1][S3] - Parliamentary passage threshold: (i) majority of total membership of each House AND (ii) at least two-thirds majority of members present and voting. [S3]

Key Actors in Justice Varma Case: - Justice Yashwant Varma: Sitting Allahabad HC judge; earlier posted in Delhi HC when currency was found. - LS Speaker: Om Birla — admitted motion on August 11, 2025; constituted inquiry committee. - CJI (then): Sanjiv Khanna — initiated in-house inquiry. - Rajya Sabha Chairman: VP C.P. Radhakrishnan (new) — SC explored his role in January 2026. - Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta heading the SC bench. - Solicitor-General: Tushar Mehta — represented LS Speaker and Secretaries-General of both Houses.

Enabling Law: Section 3(2), Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 [S1]

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Legal / Constitutional

Ethical / Governance

Administrative

Historical

6. Recent Developments (Last 12–18 months)

7. Prelims Hooks

  1. Article 218 of the Constitution applies the judge-removal procedure (Article 124(4)) to High Court judges. [S3]
  2. The Judges (Inquiry) Act was enacted in 1968. [S3]
  3. Under Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, the Speaker/Chairman constitutes the inquiry committee upon admitting the motion. [S1]
  4. The inquiry committee must comprise: (i) a SC judge, (ii) a HC Chief Justice, (iii) a distinguished jurist — always three members. [S3]
  5. Minimum signatures required: 100 Lok Sabha members OR 50 Rajya Sabha members to move a removal motion. [S3]
  6. Parliamentary removal requires a special majority: majority of total membership + two-thirds of members present and voting — in both Houses. [S3]
  7. The word "impeachment" does not appear in the Constitution of India — the term is colloquially used. [S3]
  8. No judge in India has ever been removed from office through the constitutional impeachment process. [S3]
  9. The burnt currency notes were found at Justice Yashwant Varma's residence on March 14, 2025, during a fire incident. [S1]
  10. The in-house inquiry committee under CJI Sanjiv Khanna reported on May 4, 2025, finding Justice Varma guilty. [S1]
  11. The Rajya Sabha motion against Justice Varma was declared "defective" and never admitted; the LS motion was admitted on August 11, 2025. [S1]
  12. The SC bench examining Justice Varma's challenge was headed by Justice Dipankar Datta. [S2]
  13. The new Rajya Sabha Chairman at the time of SC hearing (January 2026) was Vice-President C.P. Radhakrishnan. [S2]
  14. Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta represented the Lok Sabha Speaker in the SC proceedings. [S2]

8. Mains Relevance

GS Paper: GS-II (Polity, Governance, Constitution, Social Justice)

Syllabus Headings: - Structure, organisation and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary — appointment and removal of judges - Parliament and State Legislatures — powers, functions, conduct of business - Separation of Powers between various organs - Important aspects of governance — transparency and accountability

Plausible Mains Question Stems: 1. "The Justice Yashwant Varma case has exposed ambiguities in the judge-removal procedure under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. Critically examine the constitutional and procedural challenges involved." (GS-II, 15 marks) 2. "Judicial accountability and judicial independence are two sides of the same coin. In light of recent developments, discuss the adequacy of India's in-house procedure and parliamentary impeachment process for removing judges." (GS-II, 15 marks) 3. "Examine the role of the Speaker and the Chairman of Rajya Sabha in initiating judge-removal proceedings. Does the Constitution mandate concurrent action by both Houses?" (GS-II, 10 marks)

9. Related Topics to Study Next

Topic Connection
Collegium System & Judicial Appointments Same systemic context of judicial accountability vs. independence
Parliamentary Privileges & Special Majorities The two-thirds + majority of membership threshold is also relevant to Constitutional Amendments (Article 368)
In-House Procedure for Judges (1997/1999 SC Resolution) The non-statutory accountability mechanism triggered before Parliamentary proceedings
Article 105 & 194 (Parliamentary Privileges) Jurisdiction of courts over Speaker's decisions in parliamentary proceedings
Separation of Powers — Kesavananda Bharati & Basic Structure Judicial independence as a basic structure element relevant to this case
CBI & Anti-Corruption Framework Investigative jurisdiction over judges — gaps in law (Veeraswami case, 1991)
Contempt of Court (SC v. Justice C.S. Karnan, 2017) A parallel, contrasting accountability mechanism used against a sitting HC judge

10. Common Errors / Trap Areas

  1. "Impeachment" is a constitutional term — WRONG. The Constitution uses "removal"; "impeachment" is colloquial and does not appear in Articles 124 or 218. [S3]
  2. Confusing quorum thresholds: The removal motion needs signatures from 100 LS members OR 50 RS members; the final vote requires a special majority in both Houses — two different thresholds at two different stages.
  3. Assuming the RS and LS must both admit the motion to proceed: The SC clarified the Judges (Inquiry) Act does not bar the Speaker from proceeding even when the RS motion was rejected. [S4]
  4. Confusing Article 124(4) with Article 124(2): 124(2) governs appointment of SC judges; 124(4) governs removal — frequently swapped in MCQs.
  5. Assuming a judge has been removed via impeachment before — No judge has ever been successfully removed through this process in India. Past motions failed (V. Ramaswami, 1993) or the judge resigned (Soumitra Sen, 2011).

11. Sources