&w=3840&q=100)
Centre to collect signatures of MPs for motion to remove Justice Varma
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Prominent opposition parties have given their in-principle approval to support the motion to remove Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma and the process of collecting signatures could begin soon, Union minister Kiren Rijiju said on Thursday.
He said the government is yet to decide whether the motion would be brought in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha.
For Lok Sabha, signatures of a minimum 100 MPs is required. For the Rajya Sabha, the requirement is the support of at least 50 MPs.
He said the signatures will be collected after the government decides on the House where the motion will be brought.
The Monsoon session will commence from July 21 and end on August 21.
According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been sought.
The committee consists of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a "distinguished jurist."
Rijiju said since the matter involves corruption in the judiciary, the government wants all political parties to be on board.
On being asked about the report of the in-committee which proved the cash discovery incident at Justice Varma's official residence here, he said the report of the three-judge panel had not indicted Justice Varma and was meant to recommend future course of action as Parliament can only remove a judge A fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court, had led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of banknotes in the outhouse.
Though the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement.
Then-CJI Sanjiv Khanna is believed to have prodded him to resign but Justice Varma dug in his heels.
The apex court has since repatriated him to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial work.
Justice Khanna had written to the president and the prime minister, recommending the removal, which is the procedure for axing members of the higher judiciary from service.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
30 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Supreme Court refuses plea to reconsider NEET-UG results, says lives and careers of students at stake
The Supreme Court on Friday (July 4, 2025) refused a plea by a National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2025 exam candidate to 'correct' the final answer key in accordance with the authoritative National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) standards and declare results afresh. A Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and R. Mahadevan dismissed the plea made by Shivam Gandhi Raina, represented by senior advocate R. Balasubramanium and advocate Sriram Parakkat, for an interim stay on the commencement or continuation of the counselling process. Noting that a similar petition to stay the NEET-UG answer key and results had come up and been dismissed a few days back, the apex court said it would not 'interfere in an national exam, putting the lives and careers of thousands of students at risk'. When Mr. Balasubramanium pointed out that the top court had intervened in previous years when answer keys were found to be wrong in multiple choice questions, the Bench noted that a committee of experts had been constituted in the aftermath of such judicial interventions to reform the question system. 'We cannot tackle individual grievances like this,' Justice Narasimha remarked. The petition alleged the violation of Articles 14 and 21A due to errors in the answer key. It said both the National Testing Agency (NTA) and the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) had failed to 'rectify demonstrably incorrect answers in the provisional as well as the final answer key, despite the submission of well-founded objections supported by authoritative academic material, thereby resulting in a gross miscarriage of justice and an unconstitutional deprivation of marks that critically impact merit and career prospects of the petitioner'. The petition referred to how the provisional answer key had three errors, specifically in questions 52, 136 (Code 47), and 140 (Code 45). 'Without delay on June 4, the petitioner submitted detailed objections with supporting evidence, including NCERT Biology, conclusively establishing that the correct answers had been erroneously marked by the NTA and MCC. However, despite these well-founded objections, the final answer key is published and the result is declared on June 14, retaining the incorrect answer for Q.136 (Code 47),' the petition pointed out.
The Wire
41 minutes ago
- The Wire
EC Officials Can Now Report Persons to Foreigner Tribunals: New Clause 5(b) in Bihar Roll 'Update' Sparks Concern
New Delhi: A drive by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to "update" voter lists in Bihar already threatens to disenfranchise millions. Now it carries a graver risk: stripping people of their citizenship. The risk stems from Clause 5(b) of the ECI's June 24, 2025, directive. The clause allows local Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) to refer anyone they suspect of being a foreign national to citizenship authorities. Legal experts and rights analysts warn this turns a routine update into a 'backdoor NRC' (National Register of Citizens), putting the fate of India's poorest people in the hands of local officials with vast, unchecked power. The stakes are now much higher. The initial fear was that crores of Bihar's poorest citizens could lose their right to vote. Now, they could lose their right to live in India. From disenfranchisement to deportation The directive is part of a voter revision ahead of Bihar's 2025 assembly elections. It requires 4.74 crore voters – nearly 60% of the electorate – to prove their eligibility with few documents, mainly a school or birth certificate. Data shows these documents are a luxury for many in Bihar, especially for people belonging to Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs), Scheduled Castes (SCs), and Muslim communities, who face high poverty and low literacy. Clause 5(b) adds a new and worrying dimension. The clause is "dangerously significant," Supreme Court lawyer Ali Kabir Zia Choudhary told The Wire. "It will trigger a citizenship determination process, leading to disenfranchisement, loss of residency, detention, even deportation," Choudhary said. "Millions could lose citizenship. This is likely to create a new scheme of corruption, since these volunteers and EROs would have the power to endanger one's citizenship with a stroke of a pen." Supreme Court lawyer Mohammad Aman Khan agreed. "This clause creates a parallel, informal pathway for citizenship verification without any of the legal safeguards," Khan told The Wire. "An ERO's 'suspicion' – a term that is undefined and vague – becomes the trigger for a process that should be governed by rigorous legal standards, not administrative discretion." Raising the stakes for the common person For an ordinary person in Bihar, the change is catastrophic because until now being unable to produce a school or birth certificate was not even a barrier to voting, let alone remaining in the country. "Earlier the stakes were the people's constitutional right to participate in democracy," says Choudhary. "But the EC has just raised it to the right to live in India! People who do not have documents to obtain the right to vote... how are they going to participate in a citizenship determination process? They can't obtain two square meals a day!" He calls the policy an example of "abject lack of empathy," noting the commission ignores the poverty in a state "where people eat rats to avoid starvation." Khan notes that this turns the legal bond between citizen and state on its head. "The state is essentially telling its poorest citizens that their existence is conditional," he argues. "The inability to produce a piece of paper, often due to the state's own past failures in education and birth registration, could now lead to an existential crisis." A 'backdoor NRC' without oversight Many are comparing the plan to the controversial NRC exercise in Assam, but experts suggest the situation in Bihar could be worse. "The comparison is very fair," Choudhary asserts. "EROs under clause 5(b) questioning citizenship is the first step in an NRC-style vetting. But unlike the Assam NRC, this process has neither any statutory basis nor is it under the supervision of the Supreme Court of India." Khan explains the danger. "The Assam NRC, for all its deep flaws, was a statutory, court-monitored process. This is decentralised and opaque, giving immense, unchecked power to thousands of individual EROs across the state. It's a recipe for arbitrary action." The power to simply "suspect" someone is the crux of the problem. "India in general suffers from rampant corruption and discrimination," warns Choudhary. "Local EROs, without adequate training, legal knowledge, or expert oversight, will make arbitrary, biased, and politically motivated decisions. There is no due process, such as a notice, a hearing, or a reasoned decision before a case is referred." Legal recourse and a call to act Both lawyers agree the Election Commission must act now. "Withdraw 5(b)," Choudhary states bluntly, "and explicitly state that EROs have no power to refer or initiate any process questioning citizenship." Khan suggests that at a minimum, "The ECI must immediately issue a clarification or a stay on Clause 5(b). In the absence of that, citizens' groups should prepare for public interest litigation." For individuals wrongly targeted, the path is difficult. While they can petition the High Court, Choudhary notes this is "nigh impossible, economically and logistically" for the people most likely to be affected. The exercise, experts conclude, turns a core principle of justice on its head. "'Presumption of innocence' is a fundamental principle of law," Choudhary concludes. "In India, this principle is turned head over heels. It is for a poor citizen to prove his citizenship and not the mighty government. And now, we are all suspects."
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
No respite as confusion prevails over Delhi fuel ban, orders awaited
After an intense backlash over the recent fuel ban targeting End-of-Life (EOL) vehicles, the Delhi Government yesterday announced that EOL vehicles will not be impounded. Environment Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa clarified on Thursday that the government is working on an alternative system to manage vehicular pollution without compromising citizens' rights.'We will not let Delhi's environment be harmed, nor will we permit the confiscation of vehicles owned by its residents,' Sirsa assured, signaling a softened stance after days of confusion and controversy stems from a direction issued under the 2018 Supreme Court ruling that bans diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years in Delhi. A separate 2014 NGT order also bars such vehicles from parking in public spaces. The implementation of this directive recently extended to fuel stations, prohibiting fuel sales to EOL vehicles, a move that was heavily criticised. In a letter addressed to the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM), Sirsa urged a pause to the enforcement of the order until the Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system is fully functional across the entire National Capital Region (NCR).The minister highlighted multiple operational roadblocks:Technological glitches and improperly placed ANPR cameras within DelhiLack of integration with NCR states' databasesUninstalled ANPR systems in adjoining regions like Gurugram and NoidaPotential rise in illegal fuel procurement due to cross-border loopholesWater Minister Parvesh Verma echoed these concerns, stating that ANPR implementation is flawed and age-based bans are irrational. 'Vehicles should be banned by looking at their pollution levels, not just their age,' he asserted, adding that uniform enforcement is absent across NCR also confirmed that Delhi officials are planning to meet with CAQM to iron out these the Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notices to the Delhi government and CAQM, following a plea by the Delhi Petrol Dealers Association, which challenged the legality of enforcing the at fuel Minister Rekha Gupta, in a statement on X, acknowledged the public distress, "This decision is adversely affecting the daily lives and livelihoods of millions of families We are fully committed to fighting air pollution, but the transition must be balanced with citizens' social and economic needs."Senior AAP leaders Saurabh Bharadwaj and Atishi, launched a scathing attack on the BJP-led Delhi Government over the controversial vehicle fuel ban, accusing it of acting in haste and lacking administrative clarity. Saurabh Bharadwaj mocked the government's handling of the policy, likening it to the fictional 'Phulera ki Panchayat,' and questioned why the government was so eager to enforce a ban allegedly based on a Supreme Court directive, only to now seek to bypass it. He criticised the overzealous push to implement the order by March 31 and questioned the role of the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM), calling it a bureaucratic body rather than a judicial authority. "If they could revoke it now, why didn't they do so earlier?" he asked, raising doubts about the motivations behind the Leader of Opposition Atishi echoed similar sentiments, branding the BJP as a 'government of U-turns' that acts under public pressure without any consistency or accountability. She pointed out that despite the public statements, no official order has yet been issued to withdraw the ELV fuel ban, further deepening the confusion. Atishi also alleged collusion between the BJP and automobile manufacturers, claiming the sudden push to scrap over 62 lakh vehicles in Delhi was driven by vested commercial interests rather than environmental concern. Demanding transparency, she challenged the BJP to reveal how much funding it had received from car manufacturers and scrap dealers, calling for answers to what she termed a betrayal of public the Delhi government's plea for postponement, CAQM is yet to issue a formal response, leaving fuel station operators in limbo. A worker at a Connaught Place petrol pump said, 'We haven't received any written order yet. Only when the company sends us a letter can we act accordingly.'advertisementUntil CAQM officially places the directive on hold, the ban technically remains in effect, adding to the ongoing confusion among citizens and enforcement to Auto Today Magazine- EndsMust Watch
