Cash at residence: Govt likely to bring impeachment motion against Justice Varma

Appointed by the CJI on March 22, the panel, comprising Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana; Justice G S Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh; and Justice Anu Sivaraman, Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, recorded the statements of a range of witnesses.

The Indian Express had reported on May 9 that then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had forwarded a copy of the inquiry report, along with a recommendation to initiate impeachment proceedings against the judge to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Justice Varma was also asked to resign but he is learnt to have refused to do so. He was transferred out on March 20 and he took oath as judge at the Allahabad High Court on April 5 but he has not been assigned work.

It is learnt that the President has now referred the former CJI’s recommendation to the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha Speaker.

Top sources in the government said that since the former CJI’s report recommended impeachment, the motion has to be brought in Parliament.

For a motion of impeachment to be taken up, it has to be moved by not less than 100 members in the Lower House, and at least 50 members in the Upper House.

“We will bring the motion in the upcoming session. We will ask both the Rajya Sabha Chairman and the Lok Sabha Speaker to take the sense of the House,” said a source, adding that the government will seek consensus from Opposition parties since the final step of impeachment has to be cleared by a two-third majority in both the Houses.

Both Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar and Speaker Om Birla are likely to reach out to Opposition leaders for evolving a consensus. “This exercise will begin soon,” said a source.

Sources in the Congress said the party had not yet been approached for a discussion on the matter.

The Monsoon session of Parliament is expected to begin by the third week of July.

The Constitution states that a judge of a constitutional court can only be removed on two grounds: proved “misbehaviour” and “incapacity”. The procedure to be followed for removal is laid down in the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968. Once a motion for impeachment is adopted by either House, the Speaker/ Chairman has to constitute a three-member committee of inquiry. The committee is headed by the Chief Justice of India or a judge of the Supreme Court, and has a Chief Justice of any High Court, and a person who is in the opinion of the Speaker/ Chairman, a “distinguished jurist”.

If the committee renders a guilty finding, the report of the committee is then adopted by the House in which it was introduced, and the judge’s removal is debated.

For an impeachment motion against an SC or HC judge to go through, at least two-thirds of those “present and voting” in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha must vote in favour of removing the judge — and the number of votes in favour must be more than 50% of the “total membership” of each House. If Parliament passes such a vote, the President will pass an order for the removal of the judge.

On May 26, the Supreme Court administration had rejected a plea seeking the panel’s report on Justice Varma of the committee under the Right to Information Act.