Context:
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna initiated an unprecedented three-member in-house inquiry into the conduct of Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma
Judiciary’s In-House Enquiry Procedure:
- Introduced by the Supreme Court (SC) to address judicial misconduct that is –
- Not severe enough to warrant impeachment under Article 124, but
- Inconsistent with the high standards of judicial office.
- Formalized Procedure – A 7-step “in-house procedure” was laid down by SC in Additional District and Sessions Judge ‘X’ vs Registrar General, Madhya Pradesh HC (2014).
Key Steps:
- Initiation of Complaint – Complaints regarding judicial misconduct can be lodged with:
- Chief Justice of a High Court (CJ of HC), Chief Justice of India (CJI), or
- President of India (who forwards it to the CJI).
- Preliminary Review – CJI reviews the allegations to check their credibility.
- If credible, the CJI may request a preliminary report from the CJ of the concerned High Court.
- Further Investigation – If the CJ of HC recommends further investigation, the CJI constitutes a 3-member inquiry committee, comprising –
- 2 High Court Chief Justices (from other High Courts).
- 1 High Court Judge.
- The committee is empowered to design its own procedure while adhering to natural justice principles (e.g., allowing the accused judge to present their case).
- Committee Report – The inquiry committee submits its report to the CJI.
- Advisory Action – If the allegations are found to be serious, the CJI advises the judge to resign or retire.
- Refusal to Resign – If the judge refuses to resign, the following steps are taken:
- The High Court CJ is instructed to withhold judicial work from the judge.
- Notification is sent to the President and Prime Minister to commence removal proceedings.
Source: IE
Previous Year Question
Consider the following statements:
1. The motion to impeach a Judge of the Supreme Court of India cannot be rejected by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha as per the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968.
2. The Constitution of India defines and gives details or what constitutes ‘incapacity and proved misbehaviour’ of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India.
3. The details of the process of impeachment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India are given in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
4. If the motion for the impeachment of a Judge is taken up for voting, the law requires the motion to be backed by each House of the Parliament and supported by a majority of total membership of that House and by not less than two-thirds of total members of that House present and voting.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
[UPSC Civil Service Exam – 2019 Prelims]
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 3 only
(c) 3 and 4 only
(d) 1, 3 and 4 only
Answer: (c)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is not correct: The Judges (Inquiry) Act,1968 contains the detailed procedures relating to the removal of Judges of the Supreme Court or the High Court. Under this Act, the Chairman or the Speaker may or may not admit the motion of impeachment.
Statement 2 is not correct: The term “incapacity and proved misbehaviour” is not explained anywhere in the Constitution.