Supreme Court Verdict on Justice Yashwant Varma's Removal Inquiry
The Supreme Court, on January 16, 2026, dismissed Justice Yashwant Varma's challenge against the Lok Sabha Speaker's decision to set up a committee to probe a motion for his removal. The court emphasized that constitutional safeguards for judges should not obstruct the removal process.
Context
- The inquiry against Justice Varma pertains to alleged misbehavior when half-burnt currency was found at his residence during his tenure as a Delhi High Court judge.
- The Lok Sabha Speaker admitted the MPs' notice for Justice Varma's removal on August 12 of the previous year, while the Rajya Sabha had rejected a similar notice, creating a procedural debate.
Court's Rationale
The bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and S.C. Sharma highlighted the need for a balance between judicial protection and the removal mechanism's efficacy.
- Justice Varma argued for a joint committee by the Rajya Sabha Chairman and Lok Sabha Speaker, referencing Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
- The court clarified that the proviso applies only if both Houses admit notices on the same day, which was not the case here.
- A rejection in one House does not incapacitate the other from proceeding legally, the court observed.
Significance of Autonomy
- The autonomy of each House cannot be compromised by the decisions of the other.
- The court emphasized that the Inquiry Act intends to prevent parallel committees, not to halt the process if one notice is rejected.
Implications
- The inquiry committee's role is to report back, while the ultimate decision on removal rests with MPs.
- Reputational damage cannot justify undermining a structured statutory process, which contains multiple safeguards.
This verdict reinforces the principle of parliamentary autonomy and provides clarity on the application of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, crucial for maintaining judicial accountability while protecting the judiciary's integrity.
