SC Flags Major Flaw in Bid to Remove High Court Judge Over Cash Row

Image Source: Internet

The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed concerns over a major procedural flaw in the ongoing removal proceedings against Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court. The judge is facing allegations of possessing cash at his official residence in Delhi, which led to a controversy. According to Justice Varma's petition, the proviso to Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, requires that a committee cannot be constituted until the motion for removal is admitted by both Houses of Parliament. However, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha admitted the motion on August 12, while the motion in the Rajya Sabha is still pending. The court observed that it is surprising that the Parliament's legal experts did not notice this procedural lapse. The bench issued a notice to the Lok Sabha Speaker and the secretary generals of both Houses of Parliament, seeking their responses on the judge's petition. The matter has been posted for further hearing on January 7. The committee constituted by the Lok Sabha Speaker comprises Justice Aravind Kumar of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Srivastava of the Madras High Court, and senior advocate BV Acharya. This committee has already issued a notice to Justice Varma, asking him to submit his statement in defense of the charges by January 12 and to appear physically on January 24. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Justice Varma, argued that the Speaker's decision to unilaterally appoint the committee violates Section 3(2) of the 1968 Act. He pointed out that the provision requires the committee to be jointly constituted by the Speaker and the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha. The bench asked Rohatgi how such an oversight by the Parliament could happen, to which he replied that there may be more pressing issues for the members of Parliament to consider. However, the bench retorted, "What can be more important than this?