Andhra Pradesh, Telangana HC: 61 Rajya Sabha members seek impeachment of judge

The district court judge who is alleged to have been victimised is under suspension.

Written by Manoj C G | New Delhi | Published:December 6, 2016 12:22 am

AS MANY as 61 members of the Rajya Sabha on Monday submitted a petition to Rajya Sabha Chairman Hamid Ansari for initiating the impeachment process of Justice C V Nagarjuna Reddy of the Telangana and Andhra Pradesh high court for alleged victimisation of a Dalit district court judge and amassing assets disproportionate to his income.

The signatories of the notice of motion for the removal of Justice Reddy under Article 217 read with Article 124 of the Constitution include Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M), D Raja (CPI), Digvijaya Singh, Oscar Fernandes, Kumari Selja, P L Punia, Shantaram Naik (Congress), Sharad Yadav (JD-U), Naresh Agarwal and Neeraj Shekhar (Samajwadi Party). None of the BJP or ruling alliance members have signed the petition.

Watch What Else Is making News

The district court judge who is alleged to have been victimised is under suspension.

The motion lists the following grounds for impeachment:

# “That he interfere(d) in judicial process including physical assault and abusing on caste lines of a Dalit junior civil judge S Rama Krishna of Rayachoty… victimisation of a Dalit judge for not submitting to his illegal demands, including, but not limited to, transfer from Rayachoty to Chintapally and misusing his position as the High Court Judge of Andhra Pradesh to use the subordinate judiciary to victimise the Dalit judge…”

# “That he possesses wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income… did not declare his assets to the Chief Justice and to the public in violation of the full court resolution of 1997.”

According to the notice, the junior civil judge, S Rama Krishna, was allegedly assaulted and called names by Reddy and his brother, Pawan Kumar Reddy, when he refused to remove the name of Reddy’s brother from a dying declaration. The dying declaration of a servant employed with Reddy’s brother was recorded by Krishna in 2012, in which the victim accused Reddy’s brother of setting him on fire “for not agreeing to sign on a blank paper.”

Sources said floor leaders of various parties handed over the notice to Ansari. Asked why the MPs had decided to take up the issue which happened in 2012, an MP said the affected party had approached the High Court and the Supreme Court and even secured some RTI documents, but decided to approach the MPs as he did not get justice. “He met the members and told his side of the story…they are convinced now,” he said.

The petition says the Dalit judge was victimised after the dying declaration was recorded. It says he was first transferred from Rayachoty before completion of his stipulated tenure, and thereafter placed under suspension based on an anonymous complaint regarding corruption allegations against him.

The copies of various complaints made by the district court judge to the police, High Court vigilance registrar, Chief Justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and to the Chief Justice of India have been attached with the notice as annexures.

As per the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968, a complaint against a Judge has to be made through a resolution either by 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 Rajya Sabha members. After the MPs submit the motion, the presiding officer constitutes a three-member committee comprising two Judges — one from the Supreme Court and one Chief Justice of a High Court if the complaint is against a HC Judge; and two Supreme Court Judges if the complaint is against a sitting Judge of the apex court — and a jurist to probe the complaint and determine if it is a case fit for initiating the process of impeachment.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. N
    Dec 6, 2016 at 10:22 pm
    It has become common practice for Ambedkarites to raise SC ST Act when their own wrongs are exposed. It has become very easy for them to create trouble and defend themselves under the guise of atrocity;br/gt;Time for India to review the need to give jobs to unqualified people who p with 25 marks, in the name of social justice. These are the people who engage in corrupt practices and then raise atrocity act against others to cover up their own acts.
    1. S
      sarath chandra
      Dec 13, 2016 at 2:36 pm
      Actual debate is supposed to be , 'are we selecting the deserving candidates from reserved categories in Govt jobs and unreserved categories?' Instead of talking about it, people draw different meaning to their perception. Corrupt people exists every where. It's character but not caste. There is no guarantee that person with high academic marks will not involve in corrupt practices. It's opportunity that brings out the inherent character. A caught fakeSC is supported by corrupt people of any other caste. Family members and relatives knew 100% truth. But Judges rely on lawyers. Refer WP34322/2011 of AP high court. Dist collector orders and Telangana Govt G.O 13 of 2016 are zeroed without any further action
    2. S
      Dec 6, 2016 at 6:48 am
      Sandy I donno abt others but reading your post I certainly know that you are a koti....ha ha ha...
      1. S
        Dec 6, 2016 at 6:51 am
        This seems to be a case of vendetta politics as often practiced by the Ambedkarites against the upper caste people. If an upper caste boss tries to discipline his subordinate who happens to belong to the privileged cl of Ambedkarites they threaten him with Atrocity act. Shame.
        1. L
          Dec 8, 2016 at 11:43 am
          When a Statutory Inquiry is in the offing to find out the truth or otherwise of the several allegations, it is too premature to make bald allegations against the victim, on the sole basis of his caste. If the allegations are proved, can a person of such conduct deserve to be a Judge of a High Court? A number of retired CJIs and Judges of Apex Court openly spoke about the cancer of corruption entering JUDICIARY of our country but so far no practicable steps have been taken to curb the same. If the relevant allegations are true,Mr.Ramakrishna should be appreciated for his bravery.
          1. C
            Dec 6, 2016 at 1:22 am
            OK if all/some of the charges proved he should removed and tried as per the law but a million dollar question to these guys who is going to punish them for blocking the august house proceedings and wasting tax payers money, before this why not these guys who self proclaim as the saviors p a law if any one block/stops/mis behaves would loose their pension/perks and be barred from contesting at least 15/20 years. Jaihind
            1. Load More Comments