Removal and Resignation of Judges in India Context: Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla decided to table the report of the inquiry commission concerning former Allahabad High Court Judge Yashwant Varma in the Lok Sabha, even though the judge had already resigned. Constitutional Provisions for the Removal of Judges Article 124(4): A Supreme Court judge can be removed from office by Parliament only on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The Constitution uses the term 'removal'; it does not use the word 'impeachment'. Article 218: The same removal procedure applies to High Court judges. The Constitution does not define the terms 'misbehaviour' or 'incapacity'. The Supreme Court has clarified that misbehaviour includes: Corruption Wilful misconduct Serious conduct that is immoral or contrary to ethical standards. Under Article 124(5), Parliament enacted the 'Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968' to lay down the procedure for investigating and proving misbehaviour or incapacity. Following the judgment in the C. Ravichandran Iyer (1995) case, the Supreme Court introduced an in-house procedure in 1999 to handle situations where serious complaints existed but did not warrant formal removal proceedings. If the in-house committee finds evidence of serious misbehaviour The Chief Justice of India will ask the concerned judge to resign. If the judge refuses, the Chief Justice will relieve him of judicial duties and recommend to Parliament that the process for his removal from office be initiated. Procedure under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 A removal motion can be introduced only with the signatures of: 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha. The motion is submitted to the Speaker (Lok Sabha) or the Chairman (Rajya Sabha). The Speaker or Chairman may admit or reject the motion. The Act does not prescribe a time limit for this decision. If the motion is admitted, a three-member…
