Internal enquiry against Justice Yashwant Verma: Procedure, Provisions and Impact

Why in the NEWS?

• Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna has constituted a three-member committee to inquire into allegations of recovery of huge sums of cash following a fire at the official residence of Justice Yashwant Verma of the Delhi High Court.

Key Points:

• The allegations against Justice Yashwant Verma of the Delhi High Court will be probed by a three-member committee. 
• The procedure for such an inquiry was laid down by a panel appointed by the Supreme Court three decades ago, and revisited by the apex court in 2014.
• The judiciary's internal probe which follows a different procedure from impeachment under the Constitution will be conducted by
• Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court,
• Justice G S Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court and
• Justice Anu Sivaraman of Karnataka High Court.

What will you read next in this topic?

1. What is the procedure for impeachment of a Judge?
2. Internal Inquiry Process of Judiciary
3. Historic decision of the Supreme Court
4. Re-evaluation of the internal investigation process in 2014
   

What is the procedure for impeachment of a Judge?

• The procedure for removal of judges of the Supreme Court and High Court in India is laid down under the Constitution.
• This is called the "Impeachment Process".

Constitutional Provisions

• Articles 124(4) and 218:
  • Article 124(4) lays down the procedure for impeachment for judges of the Supreme Court.
  • Under Article 218, the same provision applies to judges of the High Court.

Grounds for removal of a judge

• A judge can be removed through the impeachment process by the Parliament on only two grounds:
• Proven Misbehaviour
• Incapacity

Procedure for impeachment motion

• Initiation of motion:
  • MPs of Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha can bring an impeachment motion.
  • The motion requires signatures of 100 MPs in Lok Sabha or 50 MPs in Rajya Sabha.
• Formation of Inquiry Committee:
  • The proposal is sent to the Lok Sabha Speaker or Rajya Sabha Chairman.
  • If they find it appropriate, a three-member committee is formed, consisting of:
  • A Supreme Court Judge
  • A High Court Chief Justice
  • An Eminent Jurist
• Report of the Inquiry Committee:
  • The committee investigates the allegations against the judge and submits a report.
  • If the committee finds the judge guilty, the motion is put to the Parliament.

Voting Process in Parliament

• Voting in both the Houses:
  • The motion has to be passed by a two-third majority in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
  • This majority is counted on the basis of members "present and voting".
  • Also, this majority should be more than 50% of the total membership of the House.
• President's Approval:
  • If the Parliament passes the motion, it is sent to the President.
  • The President gives his assent and issues an order removing the concerned judge from office.

Important Points

• If the term of the Parliament expires or the Parliament is dissolved, the motion automatically lapses.
• No judge has been removed through the impeachment process in Indian history so far.

Internal Inquiry Process of Judiciary

• Complaints against judges can be brought not only by MPs but also before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court.
• The need for an internal mechanism was felt after allegations of financial irregularities surfaced against Bombay High Court Chief Justice A M Bhattacharya in 1995.
• The internal inquiry process of the judiciary is different from the impeachment process under the Constitution.
• This process was formulated by the Supreme Court in 1997 and amended in 2014. 
• Its key features are as follows:

Complaint Receipt and Preliminary Report

• When a serious complaint is received against a judge, it is sent to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (CJI).
• The CJI may seek a report from the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court for preliminary investigation of this complaint.
• If the preliminary report indicates the need for in-depth investigation, the CJI constitutes a three-member committee.

Inquiry Process of the Three-member Committee

• The committee determines its procedure in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
• The judge concerned is given an opportunity to present his side.
• The committee may question witnesses and collect evidence.
• After a thorough investigation, the committee prepares a report.

Investigation report and further action

• After the investigation is completed, the committee submits its report to the CJI.
• This report analyses two key points:
• Are the allegations against the concerned judge true?
• If the allegations are true, are they serious enough to recommend the judge’s removal?

Decision based on the findings of the report

• If the allegations are not found to be true
• The report is placed on record, and the judge faces no action.
• If the allegations are true but not removal-worthy
• The CJI may “advise” the judge and the report is placed on record.
• If the allegations are serious and removal-worthy
• The CJI advises the judge concerned to resign or take voluntary retirement.
• If the judge does not do so, then,
• He is not assigned any judicial work.
• The Prime Minister and the President are informed to initiate the removal process.

Historic decision of the Supreme Court

• The Bombay Bar Association had filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking the resignation of Bombay High Court Chief Justice A M Bhattacharya.
• In C. Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice A.M. Bhattacharya (1995), the Supreme Court held that:
• “There is a difference between proven misbehaviour and misconduct.”
• The impeachment process can only be applied in extremely serious cases.
• But there should also be an internal process for judges who violate judicial ethics.

Establishment of internal investigation process

• The Supreme Court constituted a five-member committee in 1997, consisting of:
• Three judges of the Supreme Court
• Chief Justices of two High Courts
• The committee submitted its report in October 1997.
• It was adopted by the Supreme Court with amendments in December 1999.

Re-evaluation of the internal investigation process in 2014

• In 2014, a woman additional district and session’s judge from Madhya Pradesh filed a sexual harassment complaint against a sitting judge of the High Court.
• The Supreme Court further clarified the internal investigation process in this case.

Seven-step process:

• The complaint is sent to the CJI, the Chief Justice of the High Court, or the President.
• The CJI seeks a report from the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court for preliminary investigation.
• If the report finds serious allegations, a three-member committee is formed.
• The committee gives the judge an opportunity to present his side.
• On completion of the investigation, the committee submits its report to the CJI.
• If the allegations are found to be true in the report, the judge is advised to resign or retire.
• If the judge does not resign, the matter is sent to the President and the Prime Minister.