Latest news with #Judges(Inquiry)Act
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Cash discovery row: Resignation only option before Justice Varma to avoid removal by Parliament
Resignation is the only option before Justice Yashwant Varma to avoid impeachment by Parliament as the government pushes for bringing a motion to remove the Allahabad High Court judge over alleged corruption. Officials aware of the procedure to appoint and remove Supreme Court and high court judges pointed out that while defending his case before lawmakers in any of the House, Justice Varma can announce that he is quitting and his verbal statement will be considered as his resignation. Should he decide to resign, he will get pension and other benefits entitled to a retired HC judge. But if he is removed by Parliament, he will be deprived of pension and other benefits, they noted. According to Article 217 of the Constitution, a high court judge "may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office." A judge's resignation does not require any approval. A simple resignation letter is sufficient. A judge may give a prospective date to step down. In such cases, the judge can withdraw the resignation before the date he or she has mentioned as the last day in office. Removal by Parliament is the other way a judge can vacate office. Then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had written to the president and the prime minister to remove Justice Varma, mired in the cash discovery row. Justice Khanna's report was based on the findings of a three-judge in house panel which investigated the case. Justice Khanna had prodded Varma to resign but he had refused, sources had earlier said. A motion could be brought in either of the two Houses of Parliament. In the Rajya Sabha, at least 50 members have to sign the motion. In Lok sabha, 100 members have to support it. According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been sought. The committee consists of the chief justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a " distinguished jurist". Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju had last week said the present case is "slightly different" as an in-house committee formed by then CJI Khanna has already submitted its report. "So what is to be done in this matter, we will take a call," he said. The minister said the process has to be followed, but how to "integrate the inquiry already conducted" needs to be decided. "As per the rule, a committee has to be constituted and then the committee has to submit a report and the report will be tabled in the House and discussions will start to impeach. Here, a committee has already been constituted, not by Parliament. But it cannot be brushed aside" as it was constituted by the CJI, he said. Responding to questions that a committee has to be mandatorily formed under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, Rijiju said the speaker will take a decision in this regard. He said reconciling the report of the in-house panel and the one under law is a "secondary matter". The primary objective is to bring the impeachment motion. Monsoon session begins July 21 and ends August 12. A fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court, had led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of cash at the outhouse. Though the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement. The apex court has since transferred him to his parent high court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial work. Supreme Court judge V Ramaswami and Calcutta HC judge Soumitra Sen had earlier faced impeachment proceedings but they resigned. Justice Varma's removal proceedings will be taken up in the upcoming Monsoon session of Parliament. This will be the first ever impeachment proceeding to be taken up in the new Parliament building.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
Cash discovery row: Justice Varma must quit to avoid removal by Parliament
Resignation is the only option before Justice Yashwant Varma to avoid impeachment by Parliament as the government pushes for bringing a motion to remove the Allahabad High Court judge over alleged corruption. Officials aware of the procedure to appoint and remove Supreme Court and high court judges pointed out that while defending his case before lawmakers in any of the House, Justice Varma can announce that he is quitting and his verbal statement will be considered as his resignation. Should he decide to resign, he will get pension and other benefits entitled to a retired HC judge. But if he is removed by Parliament, he will be deprived of pension and other benefits, they noted. According to Article 217 of the Constitution, a high court judge "may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office." A judge's resignation does not require any approval. A simple resignation letter is sufficient. A judge may give a prospective date to step down. In such cases, the judge can withdraw the resignation before the date he or she has mentioned as the last day in office. Removal by Parliament is the other way a judge can vacate office. Then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had written to the president and the prime minister to remove Justice Varma, mired in the cash discovery row. Justice Khanna's report was based on the findings of a three-judge in house panel which investigated the case. Justice Khanna had prodded Varma to resign but he had refused, sources had earlier said. A motion could be brought in either of the two Houses of Parliament. In the Rajya Sabha, at least 50 members have to sign the motion. In Lok sabha, 100 members have to support it. According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been sought. The committee consists of the chief justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a " distinguished jurist". Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju had last week said the present case is "slightly different" as an in-house committee formed by then CJI Khanna has already submitted its report. "So what is to be done in this matter, we will take a call," he said. The minister said the process has to be followed, but how to "integrate the inquiry already conducted" needs to be decided. "As per the rule, a committee has to be constituted and then the committee has to submit a report and the report will be tabled in the House and discussions will start to impeach. Here, a committee has already been constituted, not by Parliament. But it cannot be brushed aside" as it was constituted by the CJI, he said. Responding to questions that a committee has to be mandatorily formed under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, Rijiju said the speaker will take a decision in this regard. He said reconciling the report of the in-house panel and the one under law is a "secondary matter". The primary objective is to bring the impeachment motion. Monsoon session begins July 21 and ends August 12. A fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court, had led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of cash at the outhouse. Though the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement. The apex court has since transferred him to his parent high court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial work. Supreme Court judge V Ramaswami and Calcutta HC judge Soumitra Sen had earlier faced impeachment proceedings but they resigned. Justice Varma's removal proceedings will be taken up in the upcoming Monsoon session of Parliament. This will be the first ever impeachment proceeding to be taken up in the new Parliament building. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
5 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Government confident of Parliament consensus on Yashwant Varma's removal
NEW DELHI: If Justice Yashwant Varma doesn't resign and holds on to his argument of being "innocent", he may earn the unenviable distinction of being the only judge to be removed through Parliament's removal motion, with most parties pledging "unity" on the issue of corruption, of which the three-member SC panel has found him guilty. Parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju said most of opposition parties favoured bringing the motion of removal, which may be introduced in the monsoon session (July 21 to Aug 12). Can't approach graft in judiciary through political prism: Rijiju Parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju said most of parties favoured bringing the motion of removal, which, by all accounts, may be introduced in the forthcoming monsoon session, scheduled from July 21 to Aug 12. Rijiju said Cabinet Committee on Parliamentary Affairs (CCPA) has sent the recommendation for the monsoon session to President Droupadi Murmu. The minister said although opposition parties would formally respond in a couple of days, he had been assured of their support and was confident of the same, as there was no scope for politicking as corruption in the judiciary could not be approached through a "political prism". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villa For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You Villas in Dubai | Search ads Learn More Undo Rijiju said he would also reach out to smaller parties as govt wants all parties to "jointly" move the motion. "Govt feels the matter related to corruption is not one political party's agenda. It is a stand of all parties to fight against the menace of corruption, whether it is the judiciary or any other space," he said. He , however, said the decision on which House the motion would be brought in - LS or RS - would be taken based on the business of each House. According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the Speaker or the Chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal has been sought. The committee will consist of the CJI or an SC judge, an HC chief justice and a "distinguished jurist". Meanwhile, Congress said govt had announced dates for the monsoon session 47 days in advance to run away from the opposition's demand for an immediate special session to discuss Pahalgam terror attack and Centre's "failure" to bring the terrorists to justice, the impact of Operation Sindoor and its "blatant politicisation".
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
6 days ago
- General
- Business Standard
Parliament's Monsoon session from July 21; Oppn demands special session
The Monsoon session of Parliament will be held from July 21 to August 12, Union minister Kiren Rijiju said on Wednesday. The minister said the Cabinet Committee on Parliamentary Affairs, led by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, has recommended the dates, which will be sent to the President for convening the session. The INDIA bloc Opposition parties have demanded a special session to discuss Operation Sindoor. In a post on X, Congress general secretary (communications) Jairam Ramesh said that normally the dates for a Parliament session are announced a few days in advance, but 'never have the dates been declared 47 days before a session is due'. Ramesh accused the government of announcing the Monsoon session dates much in advance 'to run away from the demand being made repeatedly' by the Opposition for 'an immediate special session to discuss the brutal Pahalgam attacks and the failure to bring the terrorists who did the killings themselves to justice, the impacts of Operation Sindoor and its blatant politicisation, the revelations of the CDS [Chief of Defence Staff] in Singapore, the hyphenation of India and Pakistan, the embedding of China in the Pakistan Air Force, the continuous claims of President Trump on mediation, and the numerous failures of our foreign policy and diplomatic engagements.' However, Rijiju said, 'Every session is a special session for us.' He added that under the rules, 'all important matters' can be discussed during the Monsoon session. The business advisory committees of both Houses will decide the issues to be taken up. The minister also said the government is committed to taking all political parties on board in moving an impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court, adding that corruption in the judiciary cannot be approached through a 'political prism'. He said the government wants the exercise to remove Justice Varma—embroiled in a case of alleged corruption and indicted by a Supreme Court-appointed committee—to be a 'collaborative effort'. Rijiju said he would reach out to smaller parties, while all major parties had already been informed of the plan to bring a motion of impeachment. According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in either House, the Speaker or the Chairperson, as the case may be, must constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal—popularly known as impeachment—is sought. The committee consists of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts, and a 'distinguished jurist'. Rijiju said the present case is 'slightly different' as an in-house committee formed by then CJI Sanjiv Khanna has already submitted its report. 'So what is to be done in this matter, we will take a call,' he said. The minister added that the process must be followed, but how to 'integrate the inquiry already conducted' needs to be decided. Trinamool Congress MP Derek O'Brien on Wednesday posted on X that the government is avoiding a special session, terming it 'Parliamentophobia (noun)', which he described as the acute condition of a government suffering from a morbid fear of facing Parliament. Speaking to reporters later, he said the government's announcement came a day after Opposition parties wrote a joint letter demanding a special session of Parliament. 'TMC has studied past announcements, and usually, the session is announced around 20 days ahead of the date of commencement. This time, they announced it 45 days ahead,' O'Brien said.
The Hindu
6 days ago
- General
- The Hindu
Justice Varma impeachment: Government reaches out to political parties, wants all on board
Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Wednesday underlined the government's resolve to take all political parties on board in moving an impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Varma, saying corruption in the judiciary cannot be approached through a "political prism". He said the government wants the exercise aimed at axing Justice Varma, embroiled in a case of alleged corruption and indicted by a Supreme Court-appointed committee, a "collaborative effort". Mr. Rijiju told reporters that he has already initiated discussions with all political parties to bring the motion in Parliament's Monsoon session, starting from July 21, against the Allahabad High Court judge. He said the government wants all parties to "jointly" move the motion to remove Justice Varma. Against corruption Mr. Rijiju said he will reach out to smaller parties, while all major parties have already been informed about the plan to bring a motion of impeachment against Justice Varma. "The government feels that the matter related to corruption is not one political party's agenda. It is a stand of all parties to fight against the menace of corruption, whether it is the judiciary or any other space," he said. The Minister underlined that the government would like to take all political parties on board on the issue, as corruption in the judiciary cannot be approached through a "political prism". He said most parties will revert after discussing the issue internally. Investigation To a query, Mr. Rijiju said the decision on whether the motion will be brought in the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha will be taken based on the business of each House. According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been sought. The committee consists of the chief justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a " distinguished jurist". Mr. Rijiju said the present case is "slightly different" as an in-house committee formed by then CJI Sanjiv Khanna has already submitted its report. "So what is to be done in this matter, we will take a call," he said. Integrating inquiry that was conducted The Minister said the process has to be followed, but how to "integrate the inquiry already conducted" needs to be decided. "As per the rule, a committee has to be constituted and then the committee has to submit a report and the report will be tabled in the House and discussions will start to impeach. Here, a committee has already been constituted, not by Parliament. But it cannot be brushed aside" as it was constituted by the CJI, he said. Responding to questions that a committee has to be mandatorily formed under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, Mr. Rijiju said the speaker will take a decision in this regard. He said reconciling the report of the in-house panel and the one under law is a "secondary matter". The primary objective is to bring the impeachment motion. Mr. Rijiju hoped that the removal proceedings would be passed in the two Houses in the Monsoon session beginning July 21 and ending August 12. The incident A fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court, had led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of cash at the outhouse. Though the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement. The then CJI Khanna is believed to have prodded him to resign but Justice Varma dug in his heels. The apex court has since transferred him to his parent cadre, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial work. Justice Khanna had written to the president and the prime minister, recommending the impeachment motion, which is the procedure for axing members of the higher judiciary from service.
