&w=3840&q=100)
Three-member Parliament panel likely to probe charges against Justice Varma
The motion—signed by 152 Members of Parliament (MPs) and submitted to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on July 21, the opening day of the Monsoon session—has triggered consultations among senior leaders across both Houses, the report added. The Rajya Sabha also received a similar notice on the same day, signed by 63 opposition MPs.
The report stated that the speaker Birla is likely to write to the Chief Justice of India to seek nominations for two members of the panel: one from the Supreme Court and one high court chief justice. The Speaker will also appoint a distinguished jurist of his choice to complete the three-member committee.
Former Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar had referred to the Judges (Inquiry) Act during Rajya Sabha proceedings on Monday, highlighting that when motions are submitted simultaneously in both Houses, a joint process must be followed, PTI reported.
Background
The controversy began after bundles of burnt and partially burnt cash were found at Justice Yashwant Varma's official residence earlier this year. Following this, an in-house committee of judges was set-up to probe the matter. It submitted a report recommending the impeachment of Justice Varma.
Justice Varma, however, has now moved the Supreme Court seeking to quash the report. On July 23, the apex court said it would constitute a bench to hear his plea.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
28 minutes ago
- The Hindu
BJP accuses Rahul Gandhi of making ‘immature' comments against Armed Forces
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday stated that Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi's credibility is at stake, citing the Supreme Court's remarks during the hearing of a criminal defamation case related to his December 2022 comments on Indo-China border tensions. At a press conference, BJP spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia said: 'Such immature, anti-Army, and demoralising statements made without any evidence or facts, especially when our Army was engaged in the Galwan incident, raise serious questions. Why does Rahul Gandhi make such statements? This is a big question. And it is a question about his credibility.' 'The question arises: Does India deserve a more responsible and better Leader of Opposition? As a Leader of the Opposition, who has taken an oath under the Constitution to safeguard the sovereignty of our country, is he destroying that very sovereignty? ...is he helping the nations which are inimical to our country? Is he demoralising the brave Indian armed forces?' the BJP leader asked. Quoting the Supreme Court's remarks, Mr. Bhatia alleged that this was not the first time Mr. Gandhi had displayed 'such an anti-India' mindset. He referred to another defamation case involving comments by the Congress leader about V.D. Savarkar. 'We all know that the commission-hungry Congress failed to procure Rafale jets for 10 years. Prime Minister Narendra Modi made sure that the Air Force received these aircraft. Displaying similar immaturity, Rahul Gandhi used inappropriate language for the Prime Minister. Subsequently, the Supreme Court's decision affirmed that the addition of Rafale jets strengthened the Air Force and was in India's national interest,' Mr. Bhatia added.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC pulls up Rahul for 'Chinese thrashing our soldiers' remark
. NEW DELHI: Rahul Gandhi , the leader of opposition in Lok Sabha, got a rap on his knuckles on Monday from the Supreme Court for his 2022 statement - Chinese are "thrashing our soldiers in Arunachal Pradesh" - while criticising the government for its handling of the Galwan Valley clash at the LAC. "If you were a true Indian, you would not say all this," the apex court told him. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih lambasted Rahul for making allegations that China captured 2,000 sq km of Indian territory and asked him whether he was present there. It made it clear to him that as leader of opposition he cannot go on saying whatever he wants. Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Gandhi, defended him saying, "if he cannot say these things which are published in the Press, he cannot be a leader of opposition". However, he agreed that the statement could have been worded better. SC's censure came during the hearing on Rahul's plea for staying a defamation case filed against him over his claim about Indian jawans having been walloped by the Chinese during the Galwan standoff. After the hearing, the court stayed the defamation proceedings against him but not before giving him an earful. "Tell, Dr Singhvi, how do you get to know that 2,000 sq km of Indian territory was occupied by the Chinese? Were you there? Do you have any credible material? Why do you make these statements without you were a true Indian, you would not say all this if there is a conflict at the border," the bench said.
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
SC prohibits construction and commercial use near historic Gumti structure in Defence Colony
New Delhi, Aug 4 (UNI) The Supreme Court has directed that the park adjacent to the historic Gumti structure located in Defence Colony, New Delhi, must not be used for any purpose other than public recreation and preservation. The Court made it clear that no construction of facilities like badminton or basketball courts, nor any form of commercial activity, will be permitted due to the sensitive nature and spatial constraints of the area. A Bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah was hearing a writ petition filed in 2019 seeking protection of the Gumti under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. "The only direction which needs to be given here is that the park should not be used for any other purpose. No activities such as construction of a badminton or basketball court shall be undertaken, considering the limitations of the area itself," the Bench observed. It added, 'Needless to say, there shall be no commercial activity or kiosks/shops allowed in the vicinity.' The petition was filed after the Defence Colony Welfare Association (DCWA) allegedly carried out unauthorized alterations near the monument, despite its historical significance. Representing the petitioner was Senior Advocate Shikhil Shiv Suri. Senior Advocates Garima Prasad and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, along with Advocate Shubhranshu Padhi, represented the respondents, with Sankaranarayanan also serving as the Court Commissioner. The case has a long history. In 2004, the Central Government issued a gazette notification intending to declare the Gumti as a monument of national importance. However, this was met with objections from the DCWA, causing delays within the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). After the Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's plea for protection under the 1958 Act, the matter was brought before the Supreme Court. In a significant development on July 16, 2025, the apex court criticized the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) for its actions, noting that they appeared to obstruct justice. The Court had then considered issuing contempt notice and directed the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the unauthorized occupation and modifications around the monument. The Court also instructed the MCD to demolish all unauthorised structures, clean the area, and hand it over to the Department of Archaeology. The Bench took note of ongoing efforts and pending tasks including, finalising and completing the Gumti's restoration plan. Publishing the official notification declaring it a protected monument. Clearing remaining debris and leveling the park area and finalizing the landscape plan with permissible public activities like cycling and walking. The Bench emphasized that the park, which consists of four quadrants, should be maintained and beautified for the benefit of the general public while preserving its natural character. The matter has been adjourned for further compliance and monitoring. UNI SNG RN
