Vice President's Statement on Supreme Court Inquiry

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar criticized the Supreme Court's in-house inquiry into the unaccounted cash found at Justice Yashwant Varma's residence, stating it "lacks constitutional premise or legal sanctity." He suggested an FIR against the judge and called for revisiting the SC’s K Veeraswami judgment, accusing it of creating immunity around the judiciary. Justice Varma, once a Delhi High Court judge, was transferred to the Allahabad High Court after being indicted by the inquiry.

Can an FIR be Registered Against Justice Varma?

The Supreme Court dismissed a petition for an FIR and a criminal investigation against Justice Varma, noting the inquiry report had been sent to President Murmu and Prime Minister Modi.

Protection for Judges

• Judicial independence requires judges to decide cases without fear of personal consequences, including criminal prosecution.
• Disgruntled litigants, political actors, or the executive can misuse cases to intimidate judges.
• The Constitution prescribes impeachment as the sole procedure for judge removal, which has never succeeded in 75 years.
• An in-house inquiry mechanism exists for complaints, but its findings must be submitted to the executive for impeachment initiation.

The Veeraswami Case

Justice K Veeraswami, former Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, faced corruption allegations shortly before retirement, leading to a CBI FIR. The case raised constitutional questions about prosecuting sitting judges.

Supreme Court Verdict on Veeraswami Case

• In 1991, the Supreme Court ruled that High Court and Supreme Court judges are "public servants" under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.
• The Chief Justice of India (CJI) must sanction prosecution, ensuring protection from executive influence.

Sanction for Prosecution

The 1991 judgment allowed the CBI to register a case against judges, used sparingly by the CJI. In 2019, CJI Ranjan Gogoi permitted an FIR against Justice S N Shukla for alleged misconduct.