'Justice Varma Impeachment Motion Reflects Collective Will Of MPs': Arjun Meghwal Interview
News18
Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal clarified that the potential impeachment of Justice Yashwant Varma is a collective initiative by Members of Parliament, and not just the government. Varma has been under scrutiny following the alleged recovery of large sums of cash from his residence and has approached the Supreme Court, claiming he was denied a fair hearing.
Meghwal told CNN-News18 that Justice Varma is entitled to challenge the process in court. He noted that a Supreme Court-led committee formed by the then Chief Justice submitted its findings to the Prime Minister and the President. However, he stressed that proceedings in Parliament are separate and independent from legal proceedings in court.
Regarding the motion expected to be tabled in the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament, Meghwal reiterated that the government has no role in this process. 'Under the Constitution, MPs can initiate a motion to remove a judge on grounds of proven misconduct or corruption, requiring the support of at least 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs. This process is entirely within their parliamentary privilege," he said.
Meghwal acknowledged that many in the opposition were disturbed by the visuals that surfaced during the alleged incident. He emphasised that this issue transcends politics, stating that both treasury and opposition benches have reacted strongly. The sentiment and anger of MPs have led to the motion.
Government sources revealed that the impeachment motion, referred to as a 'removal motion," has already garnered over 100 signatures from members of the ruling BJP and its allies. Opposition members are also expected to submit their signatures shortly. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju has reportedly engaged with several opposition leaders, including Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin, and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, to build consensus.
Once the motion is formally submitted, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha will decide whether to admit it. If admitted, a three-member committee will be formed, comprising a sitting Supreme Court judge, a High Court judge, and a distinguished jurist. This committee will investigate the charges against Justice Verma and submit a report to Parliament.
Initially, the committee will have three months to complete its inquiry, though extensions can be granted if needed. The Monsoon Session of Parliament, scheduled from July 21 to August 21, with a brief recess in between, is expected to focus significantly on the impeachment proceedings.
view comments
First Published:
July 18, 2025, 13:36 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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
5 minutes ago
- NDTV
" Yeh Andar Ki Baat Hai": Uddhav Thackeray On D Fadnavis' 'Offer'
New Delhi: Uddhav Thackeray has responded to an 'offer' by Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis that has sparked huge speculation. The two former allies - one who headed the Shiv Sena before it broke into two factions, and the other from the BJP - made comments that appeared like signalling for something significant. Mr Fadnavis, however, cleared the air. It was a joke, he said, referring to his comment that "Uddhav ji" has the scope to reunite with the ruling Mahayuti alliance. "Uddhav ji, there is no scope (for a change in government) till 2029. We do not have the scope to come to the other (Opposition's) side. You have the scope to come here, and it can be thought about. We can think about it differently," the chief minister had said. To a question by reporters on Friday, Mr Fadnavis said, "Why do you take our jokes seriously? Even Uddhavji has said it was said in a lighter note. Don't take our tension. We (Mahayuti) are capable and competent." Mr Thackeray, who heads the Shiv Sena (UBT), also met the chief minister on Thursday, a development that led to a buzz over something in the works. Later, Shiv Sena (UBT) leader and Uddhav Thackeray's son Aaditya Thackeray said his father met Mr Fadnavis to discuss the Marathi language issue, which has been in the news in recent times. Mr Thackeray met Mr Fadnavis in the chamber of legislative council chairperson Ram Shinde. Worli MLA Aaditya Thackeray was also present in the meeting that lasted for about half-an-hour. On Friday, when reporters asked Uddhav Thackeray about Mr Fadnavis' offer, the Shiv Sena (UBT) leader said, "Before speaking to you, I was speaking to the print media. I spoke about the chaddi baniyan gang. Chaddi baniyans also have an advertisement - yeh andar ki baat hai." The "chaddi baniyan" reference was to a comment by Congress leader Vijay Wadettiwar who in the assembly said the BJP-led Mahayuti alliance has fostered a culture of violence, misgovernance and corruption, turning Maharashtra into a "20 per cent commission" state. "While koyta gangs (gangs wielding 'koyta' knives) wreaked havoc in Pune, the ruling party has its own chaddi baniyan gang who resort to violence if things do not go their way," Mr Wadettiwar said. The undivided Shiv Sena led by Uddhav Thackeray parted ways with longtime ally BJP after the 2019 assembly election over a dispute on sharing the chief minister's post.
NDTV
5 minutes ago
- NDTV
Will "Shut Down" Maharashtra Schools If Hindi Imposed From Class 1: Raj Thackeray
Mumbai: MNS chief Raj Thackeray on Friday warned Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis that if Hindi was made compulsory for Classes 1 to 5 in the state, "we will not hesitate to shut down schools". Speaking at a rally at Mira Bhayandar in the district, he asked the people of Maharashtra to stay alert and foil any plan of the government to impose Hindi. Earlier, workers of the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) had roughed up a local shopkeeper after he allegedly refused to speak in Marathi. The BJP-led government recently withdrew two orders making Hindi mandatory in primary schools following strong opposition. Fadnavis, however, asserted on Thursday that the government will certainly introduce the three-language formula, but whether Hindi should be taught from Class 1 or Class 5 will be decided by the committee appointed to study the issue. Raj Thackeray, in his speech, dared Fadnavis to impose Hindi. "When they tried it once, we had shut down shops, and now we will not hesitate to shut down schools if Hindi is imposed (from Class 1 to 5)," he said. It was unfortunate that the chief minister of Maharashtra was striving to make Hindi compulsory, the MNS chief said. By imposing Hindi, the government was testing the people's response as it eventually wanted to attach Mumbai to Gujarat, Mr Thackeray alleged. Hindi was just "200 years old" while Marathi has a history of 2,500-3,000 years, he said. When migrants from Bihar were beaten up and driven away in Gujarat, it did not become an issue, but a minor incident in Maharashtra became a national issue, Raj Thackeray alleged. He also came down heavily on BJP MP Nishikant Dubey over his reported "patak patak ke marenge" remark, daring him to come to Mumbai. "Dube-dube ke marenge," Mr Thackeray said. He also referred to Morarji Desai and Vallabhbhai Patel's alleged anti-Marathi stand after independence. Maharashtrians should insist on speaking in Marathi everywhere in the state and make others speak the language, he said. Under the garb of Hindutva, there is an attempt to impose Hindi, he said. Raj, however, also stated that he can speak Hindi better than any other politician in Maharashtra, as his father was fluent in Hindi, and he was not against any language per se but opposed its imposition.
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta questions locus of X Corp to approach Karnataka High Court under right to freedom of speech
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta Friday questioned the locus standi of X Corp to approach the Karnataka High Court under the aegis of the right to freedom of speech. He also raised the issue of internet anonymity by raising the example of a fake X account named 'Supreme Court of Karnataka'. X has been arguing in the high court that takedown orders should be issued under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, and not Section 79 (3) (b) of the same Act. Section 69A lays out the grounds and power for a direction to be issued for any agency or intermediary to block certain content, while Section 79(3)(b) provides for removal of the usual protection granted to intermediaries such as X if unlawful material is not removed. X Corp has also raised concerns regarding the Sahyog Portal for intermediaries, referring to it in an earlier hearing as a 'censorship portal'. Solicitor General Mehta also questioned the citing of the 'chilling effect' on freedom of speech, and claimed X Corp could not take advantage of it, as it was only a right for users. While concluding his submissions, he stated, 'X has no locus standi to file the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, at least claiming Article 19(1)a rights (freedom of speech), or Article 14 rights (right to equality)… the petitioner is an out and out foreign commercial entity. The petitioner has a mere status of intermediary and no more. It is neither a citizen of India nor a natural person… It is for the individual citizens of the country to ventilate their fundamental rights.' He had earlier stated on the topic of anonymity in the online medium, 'We have opened one account in the name of the 'Supreme Court of Karnataka', and Twitter has opened that account… I can post anything in that, and lakhs of people will say that the Supreme Court of Karnataka has said it. I can remain anonymous or pseudonymous…' Senior Advocate K G Raghavan, who represents X, had raised objections to this, pointing out that it had not been put on the record. He stated, 'I am not on who created it, etc… I am only saying, if it is to be relied upon as part of a counsel's submission…' The judge said it had been taken only in the nature of an illustration, adding, 'You can rest assured that this illustration will not prejudice.' Raghavan later stated that the account in question had been taken down. Solicitor General Mehta also made submissions on the topic of the Sahyog Portal. On the question of whether even a metro engineer could be an authorised person to issue notices under the Sahyog Portal, he said, 'He is a designated authority… it is not necessary that police persons are only the designated authority. If this type of situation arises… some authority will have to be designated in each department. What used to happen was anybody used to write a letter. Some police stations in Kolkata etc, would send a letter to Facebook… intermediaries came to us – if you have a portal, intermediaries will know that somebody has authorised this. And the Government will also know about the compliance. It is merely an administrative mechanism. Twitter has chosen not to join… rest of them (intermediaries) have joined the portal.' Replies in the matter by Senior Advocate K G Raghavan are set to continue on July 25.
