Dhankhar has been keeping unwell, though was mostly seen energetic in RS
PTI
Last Updated:
New Delhi, Jul 22 (PTI) Jagdeep Dhankhar, who stepped down as the vice president citing health reasons, has been keeping unwell, even though he appeared lively and energetic in Rajya Sabha, which he presided over as chairperson.
He was admitted to the AIIMS here for a few days in March, following which he was advised to curtail his trips outside the national capital for a while.
In June, on a visit to Nainital in Uttarakhand, Dhankhar had collapsed at the Kumaon University.
Officials had then said the day was 'unusually hot" and the hall in which he was addressing a gathering was 'stuffy". They said he had fainted briefly, and his personal security officer was quick to hold him.
Earlier this month, on a visit to Kerala, the former vice president was seen being held by his spouse, Sudesh, and an aide as he was walking.
Again, on July 17, Dhankhar felt unwell when he went to Vatika developed by Delhi LG VK Saxena.
It took him a few minutes to recover as his spouse offered him water.
In his resignation letter to President Droupadi Murmu on Monday evening, Dhankhar said he was stepping down with immediate effect to 'prioritise health care".
'To prioritise health care and abide by medical advice, I hereby resign as Vice President of India, effective immediately, in accordance with Article 67(a) of the Constitution," he said.
Dhankhar, 74, assumed office in August 2022 and his tenure was till August 2027. The resignation of Dhankhar, the Rajya Sabha Chairman, came on the first day of the Monsoon session of Parliament. PTI NAB VN VN
view comments
First Published:
July 22, 2025, 16:15 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
"Stay Strong": Trump Ally Meets Imran Khan's Sons, Slams Political Arrests
/ Jul 23, 2025, 11:34AM IST Former US ambassador and Trump's envoy for special missions, Richard Grenell, met with the sons of jailed PTI founder and former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in California. Calling Khan's imprisonment a case of 'political prosecution,' Grenell expressed solidarity with Sulaiman Isa and Kasim Khan, urging them to "stay strong." He drew parallels between Khan's legal troubles and former President Donald Trump's, stating that both leaders face politically motivated charges. Grenell also recalled better US-Pakistan relations under the Trump-Khan leadership. Meanwhile, PTI continues to raise alarm over Khan's detention conditions, warning of a looming constitutional and humanitarian crisis in Pakistan.#richardgrenell #imrankhan #pti #uspakrelations #donaldtrump#politicalprosecution #humanrights #adialajail #pakistanpolitics #imrankhanarrest #freeimrankhan
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
CJI agrees to constitute Bench to hear plea on behalf of Justice Varma
Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai on Wednesday (July 23, 2025) said he will constitute a Bench for hearing a petition filed on behalf of Allahabad High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma, challenging the in-house inquiry procedure and the then Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna's recommendation to the President and Prime Minister, in the month of May, to remove the judge from office. The Chief Justice said he, however, would not be part of the Bench. 'I will have to constitute a Bench on this. I think it will not be proper for me to take up the matter because I was part of the consultations then,' Chief Justice Gavai addressed senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who made an oral mentioning for an early hearing of the petition. 'That is for you to decide,' Mr. Sibal replied. 'We will just take a call and constitute a Bench,' Chief Justice Gavai said. Mr. Sibal said the petition has raised several constitutional issues with respect to the recommendation made by Chief Justice Khanna (now retired) for the removal of Justice Varma. The Chief Justice's willingness to judicially examine the question of removal of Justice Varma comes a couple of days after a removal motion was initiated when Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha members submitted notices to the presiding officers of their respective Houses. The petition in the Supreme Court argued that the in-house inquiry process was a 'parallel, extra-constitutional mechanism' designed for the judiciary to usurp the Parliament's exclusive authority. An in-house inquiry committee of three judges had confirmed that unaccounted cash was found in the gutted storeroom at the official residential premises of Justice Varma after a blaze on March 14-15. Chief Justice Khanna had forwarded the report to the Prime Minister and President in May after Justice Varma refused to resign. The challenge in the apex court contended that the in-house inquiry took away the exclusive powers of the Parliament under Article 124 and 218 of the Constitution to remove judges through an address supported by a special majority after an inquiry under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. 'This Act provides a comprehensive, legislatively sanctioned process with stringent safeguards, including formal charges, cross-examination, and proof beyond reasonable doubt for 'proved misbehaviour'. On the other hand, the in-house procedure, which adopts no such comparable safeguards, usurps parliamentary authority,' the petition said. The petition, filed under an anonymous acronym 'XXX', described the petitioner as an Allahabad High Court judge. The in-house procedure, devised by the Supreme Court, had no legal sanction. It was a threat to the separation of powers, the petition argued. Justice Varma urged the apex court to declare the in-house procedure unconstitutional. The petition argued the in-house inquiry procedure against sitting judges was also a threat to judicial independence, an essential part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution. 'It overreaches constitutional limits by enabling punitive outcomes without legislative sanction, concentrating excessive power without standards or safeguards, and thus erodes judicial independence and public confidence,' it submitted. It also made a direct attack on Chief Justice Khanna, saying the latter did not give Justice Varma a personal hearing after the committee report came out nor had afforded him a chance to properly review the document. The petition pointed out that the inquiry reached its conclusions merely on the basis of presumptions. There was not even a formal complaint about the 'discovery' of cash. Neither was the alleged cash seized or panchnama prepared. The whole series of events were based on certain photos and videos privately taken by some officials. It said the inquiry committee was unfair to the High Court and did not find the answers it was constituted for, including when, how and by whom was the cash placed in the outhouse.
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Supreme Court allows man, estranged IPS wife to part ways
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday (July 22, 2025) invoked its extraordinary powers to allow divorce to a woman IPS officer and her estranged husband as it quashed several civil and criminal cases they filed against each other. A Bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih further directed the woman IPS officer and her parents to tender an unconditional apology to the family of the estranged husband. Supreme Court issues notices to Union and States on Presidential reference on President, Governor's powers The Bench was exercising powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to bring the curtain down on their acrimonious and protracted legal battles after their marriage solemnised in 2015 went kaput in 2018. Article 142 empowers the top court to issue any order necessary for "complete justice" in any matter pending before it. 'In terms of the …observations, directions and conditions/settlement, we deem it appropriate to invoke our power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and order for dissolution of marriage between …. The decree of divorce shall be drawn up accordingly,' the top court said. The Bench took note of the submissions of both the parties wanting to amicably resolve disputes, including matters of child custody, and settle all pending cases to avoid any future litigation and maintain peace between them. Presidential Reference concerns all States, will answer all questions raised: Supreme Court On the custody of their daughter, the Bench said, 'Mother shall have the custody of the child. The father…and his family shall have supervised visitation rights to meet the child for the first three months and thereafter based on the comfort and wellbeing of the minor girl child…, on the first Sunday of every month at the place of education of the child from 9 a.m. to to 5 p.m. or as permitted under the rules and regulations of the school.' It also considered the fact that the woman has voluntarily agreed to forgo her claim to any alimony from the husband. The Bench, as a result, quashed the high court order of ₹1.5 lakh maintenance a month to the wife. 'To bring an end to the protracted legal battle between the parties and to secure complete justice, all pending criminal and civil litigations filed by either party against the other, including but not limited to those against the wife, the husband, and his family members, in any court or forum in India as mentioned in… are hereby quashed and/or withdrawn,' the top court ordered. The Bench further quashed cases filed by third parties against them aside from those not in the knowledge of either parties. It also restrained the spouses from filing litigations in future arising out of present matters in any judicial or quasi-judicial or regulatory or administrative forum or any other forum. The wife was directed to "never use her position and power as an IPS officer or any other position that she may hold in future, position and power of her colleagues/superiors or other acquaintances anywhere in the country, against the husband, his family members and relatives by way of initiating any proceedings before any authority or forum... in any manner whatsoever." The Bench considered the fact that the husband and his father remained behind bars owing to the cases filed by the IPS wife and asked her and her parents to tender an unconditional apology. The apology was directed to be published in the national edition of a renowned English and Hindi daily.
