logo
RS Secretariat verifies 44 MPs' signatures to remove HC Judge Yadav

RS Secretariat verifies 44 MPs' signatures to remove HC Judge Yadav

The Rajya Sabha secretariat has verified the signatures of 44 of the 55 MPs who had signed a notice to bring a motion for the removal of Allahabad High Court Judge Shekhar Yadav over his "hate speech" even as Kapil Sibal and nine others were yet to verify their signatures.
Sibal, who has been vocal for early action on the notice, has claimed that he has not received any email from the Rajya Sabha secretariat, which confirmed having sent the same to his official email thrice during the past six months.
He has questioned the need for verification of signatures and the delay in initiating the process in March when the notice was submitted on December 13, 2024.
While 55 MPs have signed the notice for the removal of Justice Yadav, the signature of one of the MPs, Sarfaraz Ahmed, appears twice on the notice. The Rajya Sabha Secretariat is verifying how his signature appeared twice on the notice and whether they are forged.
Ahmed, the JMM MP from Jharkhand, has already met Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar on the issue and confirmed having signed only once and not twice, sources said.
They also said the notice for removal of Justice Yadav, which was submitted by 55 opposition MPs, is undated and not addressed to anyone.
The Constitution states that a judge can only be removed from service after both Houses of Parliament approve a motion with a two-thirds majority of the present members. Thereafter, the President has to grant approval to the same.
Such a motion can be moved in the Rajya Sabha only after 50 MPs sign the same. For Lok Sabha, signatures of 100 MPs are needed.
According to sources, Sibal, a former Union minister and now an Independent MP, is yet to verify his signature with the Rajya Sabha Secretariat even after three reminders on his official email in the last six months.
"I have met Chairman Dhankhar several times but he has never raised the issue of verification of my signatures on the notice for the removal of Justice Yadav as I am the presenter and initiator of the entire process," Sibal told PTI.
He also mentioned that the need for signature verification arises only when someone questions the signatures on the notice. He also questioned the delay and said the House chairman should accept or reject the notice and not delay the process.
Sibal has been extremely vocal on the issue and has questioned the delay in the acceptance of the notice for removal of Justice Yadav by the Rajya Sabha chairman.
He has said that such a judge should not be protected and has called for the removal of Justice Yadav for making communal remarks at an event last year.
While he has also questioned the logic behind the six-month period taken for signature verification, sources point out at least 10 MPs were yet to verify their signatures before the Rajya Sabha Secretariat which has sent them reminders to do so on March 7, March 13, and May 1.
Chidambaram said the physical document (notice) was shown to him for the first time on Tuesday for verification of his signature, which he has done.
The MPs whose signatures have not been verified and were yet to respond to the email queries of the Rajya Sabha secretariat include AAP's Raghav Chadha and Sanjeev Arora, TMC's Sushmita Dev, Kerala Congress MP Jose K Mani, Ajit Kumar Bhuyan, G C Chandrasekhar and Faiyaz Ahmed.
Rajya Sabha Chairman Dhankar had already addressed the issue in the House during the last session and confirmed that the representation by MPs has to be verified and the process was underway.
"I have taken all procedural steps, but I must share with you one concern that is engaging my attention. Of the 55 members, who signed the representation, a member's signature appears on two occasions and the member concerned has denied his signature.
"I do not wish to get into this act which may graduate to culpability to a higher level. If the number is above 50, I will proceed accordingly. Most of the members have cooperated. Those members, who have not done so far, may please do it in response to the second mail sent to them. Then, the process will not be delayed at my level even for a moment," he told the House on March 21 this year.
Rajya Sabha sources said the possibility of a criminal investigation by the Ethics Committee and the Privileges Committee into the notice seeking the removal of Justice Shekhar Yadav in the House cannot be ruled out as the document bears "forged" signatures.
Article 124 of the Constitution states, "A Judge of the Supreme Court shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting has been presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity." "Parliament may by law regulate the procedure for the presentation of an address and for the investigation and proof of the misbehaviour or incapacity of a Judge under clause (4)," it adds.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

At House panel meet, questions on why no FIR after cash seizure at judge's residence
At House panel meet, questions on why no FIR after cash seizure at judge's residence

Indian Express

time30 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

At House panel meet, questions on why no FIR after cash seizure at judge's residence

From judges attending ideological meetings to the demand for FIR against Justice Yashwant Varma to judges not following code of conduct rules, the Parliamentary Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice discussed a wide range of issues at a meeting on Tuesday. Among the most asked questions by the committee members was why an FIR was not registered against Justice Yashwant Varma after allegations of cash being found at his official residence. Cash was found at the residence of Justice Varma in Delhi when a fire broke out there on March 14. Justice Varma was indicted by the in-house inquiry on May 8. The government has initiated the process for bringing an impeachment motion against Justice Varma during the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament. It is learnt that a member also suggested that the 1991 judgment in 'K Veeraswami vs Union of India' case should be relooked and if judges are involved in wrongdoings, they should face an FIR. The Department of Justice Secretary is learnt to have told the panel members that he will get back regarding the demand for an FIR against Justice Varma. The issue of Justice Shekhar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court against whom Rajya Sabha members have moved an impeachment notice also came up. One member wanted to know what action had been taken against Justice Yadav by the CJI. In December last year, Justice Yadav, a sitting judge of Allahabad High Court, had made questionable remarks on Muslim marriage practices and backed the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) while speaking at a VHP event. An impeachment notice was submitted by 54 Rajya Sabha MPs against Justice Yadav. At Tuesday's meeting of the committee chaired by BJP MP Brij Lal, another member was said to have suggested that judges should have a cooling off period of five years after retirement during which they shouldn't be allowed to take up any kind of job or work, or political assignments or contest elections. Another member also suggested an increase in the retirement age of judges and that they should get a better salary and pension. The agenda of Tuesday's meeting was to discuss the code of conduct for judges of higher judiciary. Asad Rehman is with the national bureau of The Indian Express and covers politics and policy focusing on religious minorities in India. A journalist for over eight years, Rehman moved to this role after covering Uttar Pradesh for five years for The Indian Express. During his time in Uttar Pradesh, he covered politics, crime, health, and human rights among other issues. He did extensive ground reports and covered the protests against the new citizenship law during which many were killed in the state. During the Covid pandemic, he did extensive ground reporting on the migration of workers from the metropolitan cities to villages in Uttar Pradesh. He has also covered some landmark litigations, including the Babri Masjid-Ram temple case and the ongoing Gyanvapi-Kashi Vishwanath temple dispute. Prior to that, he worked on The Indian Express national desk for three years where he was a copy editor. Rehman studied at La Martiniere, Lucknow and then went on to do a bachelor's degree in History from Ramjas College, Delhi University. He also has a Masters degree from the AJK Mass Communication Research Centre, Jamia Millia Islamia. ... Read More

‘India will never accept dictatorship'—Amit Shah on 50th anniversary of ‘dark chapter' of Emergency
‘India will never accept dictatorship'—Amit Shah on 50th anniversary of ‘dark chapter' of Emergency

The Print

time2 hours ago

  • The Print

‘India will never accept dictatorship'—Amit Shah on 50th anniversary of ‘dark chapter' of Emergency

'Remember the morning when Indira Gandhi announced the Emergency on All India Radio. Was Parliament consulted before this? Were the opposition leaders and citizens taken into confidence?' he said at an event organised by Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation on the eve of 50 years of the imposition of the 1975 Emergency. Shah further took a jibe at the Congress, saying that he wants to know the political affiliation of those preaching the sanctity of the Constitution. New Delhi: India will never accept dictatorship, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said Tuesday, asserting that the people overcame a 'dark chapter like the Emergency because our nation never bows down to dictatorship'. 'Those who talk about protecting democracy today—were you the Rakshaks (protectors) of the Constitution back then, or its Bhakshaks (destroyers)? They claimed the Emergency was declared to protect the nation. But the truth is—it was declared to protect their own power,' Shah asserted. Recalling the number of people who were imprisoned during the Emergency, Shah even took a jibe at the Congress and its allies, saying, 'Today there are those with the Congress who were in jail during the Emergency. Be it Samajwadi or DMK. Today they are sitting with the Congress and raising questions about democracy and the Constitution.' According to Shah, the Congress' decline after the Emergency is a 'lesson' for political parties, 'whatever the ideology, the aim is to make the country great. The mindset that there should be only one ideology, that only I am correct, will not work.' 'Won't forget till I die' Shah began his speech with the intent to answer the question as to why the Emergency is being remembered and referred to so many years later. 'Some may wonder why we are recalling something that happened decades ago. But I believe that in any civil society, time may fade memories, yet forgetting an event like the Emergency, which shook the very foundations of our democracy, is dangerous for the nation,' he explained. It was important that the memories of the Emergency do not fade away, so that the youth are able to recall what happened during the time, he said. Shah even urged the youth to read up the Shah Commission report, which was appointed by the Janata Party government in 1977 to inquire into the illegalities committed during the Emergency. Shah said that he was 11 years old when the Emergency was imposed, claiming that 184 people from his village were sent to jail. 'Till today, and till I die, I will not be able to forget that moment.' Also Read: These 80 Indians in America mounted the first protest against Indira Gandhi's Emergency 'Everything was changed' Shah listed down the changes made by then prime minister Indira Gandhi during the Emergency, pointing out that it came to be known as a 'mini Constitution'. 'From the Preamble to the Basic Structure everything was changed. The judiciary became submissive, and democratic rights were suspended. The nation can never forget. That is why PM Modi decided to observe June 25 as Samvidhan Hatya Diwas (or, Constitution Murder Day) so that the country remembers how a nation suffers when its leaders turn into dictators,' he asserted. He urged the gathering to imagine what the Emergency felt like to ordinary people. 'Just imagine that moment during the Emergency—one day, you are a free citizen of India, and the next morning, you wake up as a subject under a dictator,' he said. 'Until yesterday, you were a journalist—the fourth pillar of democracy, showing the mirror of truth. The next day, you are labelled an anti-social element and declared anti-national. You didn't raise any slogans, didn't take part in any protest—your only 'fault' was that your thoughts were free,' Shah added. Towards the end of this address, he asserted that the spirit of the Constitution cannot be upheld by the courts or Parliament alone, it is also the responsibility and right of every citizen. 'I believe Samvidhan Hatya Diwas should be observed collectively and consciously, so that the youth never forget how the Constitution was once silenced,' he added. (Edited by Tony Rai) Also Read: If Emergency was brought in the interest of the nation, I am with Indira ji—Bal Thackeray in 2007

Ground Air India Boeing jets pending safety audit: Plea in top court after crash
Ground Air India Boeing jets pending safety audit: Plea in top court after crash

India Today

time2 hours ago

  • India Today

Ground Air India Boeing jets pending safety audit: Plea in top court after crash

A public interest litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court seeking an immediate safety audit of Air India's Boeing fleet, days after an the airliner's Boeing 787 Dreamliner crashed in Ahmedabad, killing 275 petition, filed by advocate Ajay Bansal, calls for the grounding of all Boeing aircraft until a comprehensive safety check is completed within a set timeframe of two India flight AI 171, bound for London, crashed on June 12 shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad airport. The Boeing 787-8 aircraft had 242 passengers and crew on board when it went down and ploughed into a medical college building. There was only one survivor. Naming the central government, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), and Air India as parties, the plea alleges that civil aviation rules are not being properly followed on commercial it a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, the petitioner argues that the safety and security of passengers is a matter of the fundamental right to the interim, the plea urges the court to "suspend operation of Boeing aircraft of Air India, pending a safety audit within two weeks, in view of the recent crash and reported maintenance backlogs."advertisementThe petition also calls for the DGCA to audit the fleets of all Indian airlines, including Air India, and publish the findings. It asks that fines be imposed on airlines found in violation of safety PIL demands that the government be directed to create new guidelines for periodic inspections of aircraft engines, airframes, and cabin plea also cites passenger complaints reported on social media about faulty seats and malfunctioning air conditioning. The petitioner argues that aircraft with such complaints should not be allowed to his petition, Bansal cited his experience on an Air India business class flight from Delhi to Chicago on May 20. He claimed the seats did not recline, entertainment systems weren't working, and air conditioning was faulty. He said the airline later offered him Rs 10,000 as Supreme Court is yet to list the matter for hearing.- EndsWith PTI inputs

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store