SC rejects plea of Justice Varma challenging legality of Parliamentary panel probing corruption charges against him
The Supreme Court dismissed Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma’s plea challenging the Lok Sabha Speaker’s decision to admit a removal motion and the parliamentary probe into corruption charges, clearing the way for impeachment proceedings to continue
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea by Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma challenging the Lok Sabha Speaker’s decision to admit a motion seeking his removal and legality of the parliamentary panel probing corruption charges against him.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma, which had reserved its decision on January 8 on Varma’s plea, pronounced the verdict.
On January 8, the top court said if the vice president can exercise the functions of the president in the absence of the president, then why cannot the Rajya Sabha deputy chairman exercise the functions of the chairman in the absence of the chairman.
The remarks were made by the bench which refused to agree with the submission made on behalf of Justice Varma that the deputy chairman of Rajya Sabha had no power to reject a motion and, under the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, only the Speaker and the chairman have the power to accept or reject a motion against a judge.
Justice Varma was repatriated from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court after burnt wads of currency notes were found at his official residence in New Delhi on March 14.
The top court had earlier orally observed that there was no bar under the Judges Inquiry Act on Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla setting up an inquiry committee to probe corruption charges against Varma after a similar motion was rejected in the Rajya Sabha.
The then chief justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had initiated an in-house inquiry and constituted a three-member committee comprising Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, Himachal Pradesh High Court Chief Justice G S Sandhawalia and Karnataka High Court Justice Anu Sivaraman.
The committee submitted its report on May 4, finding Justice Varma guilty of misconduct.
After Justice Varma declined to resign, the then CJI forwarded the report and the judge’s response to the President and the prime minister, setting the stage for impeachment proceedings.
Subsequently, Birla admitted a multi-party motion for Justice Varma’s removal on August 12 and constituted a three-member inquiry committee comprising Supreme Court judge Justice Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, and senior advocate B V Acharya.
Justice Varma has sought quashing of the Speaker’s action, the admission of the motion, and all consequential notices issued by the inquiry committee, contending that the entire process is unconstitutional and contrary to the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
