CJI recommends impeachment of Calcutta HC judge

Justice Balakrishnan sought the PM’s “intervention to initiate impeachment process” in Parliament as a three-judge inquiry committee had established Sen’s misconduct in depositing the money in his personal account, despite being aware that the proceeds had to be kept in a bank of his choice for safe custody, said officials in the Prime Minister’s Office.

Moreover, that he chose to retain the money even after being elevated to the High Court in 2003, and parted with it only after the HC ordered him in April 2006 to pay it back, also weighed heavy on the panel in arriving at the recommendation.

“The three-judge panel did not see any rationale in Sen holding on to the money,” said PMO officials. The PMO forwarded the letter to Ministry of Law & Justice early last month for “appropriate action”, they said.

Sen was a practising advocate in the Calcutta High Court when he was appointed court receiver by Justice A N Roy to sell the fire bricks and keep custody of the proceeds. Instead, he deposited the money in his bank account. His act was challenged by SAIL in 2005, and in April 2006, the Court of Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, who had replaced Roy, asked him to pay back the money with interest since 1993. Sen had to deposit Rs 52.46 lakh with the court.

Once Sen’s misconduct was established by the three-judge committee, the CJI sought the PM’s intervention as the Constitution does not provide a procedure for the judiciary or to the government to start the impeachment process. The in-house judges committee has no powers to take action against an errant judge.

The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 stipulates that a motion for removal of a judge involving allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity may be admitted if notice is given by at least 100 members of Lok Sabha or 50 members of Rajya Sabha, then it can be referred to a committee for investigation.

The first impeachment process initiated against a judge under this Act was against Supreme Court Justice V Ramaswami in 1991 for misconduct in furniture purchases when he was the Chief Justice of Haryana HC. An inquiry committee ruled against him and Lok Sabha MP Madhu Dandavate moved a motion to the President for removal of the judge under Act 124 (4) of the Constitution read with Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act. It had signatures of more than 100 MPs, was submitted to the Speaker of the House who admitted the motion. A vote was called but the ruling party, the Congress, abstained.

The only judge to be removed in independent India is Justice Shiva Prasad of Allahabad HC by then Governor General of India C Rajagopalachari on April 22, 1949 accepting a report of the Federal Court.