Latest news with #Judges(Inquiry)Actof1968
Time of India
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Opposition on board for Judge Varma's ouster: Kiren Rijiju
Union Minister Kiren Rijiju announced that opposition parties have tentatively agreed to support the motion to remove Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma. The process of collecting signatures from MPs will begin soon, following the procedure outlined in the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Days ahead of Parliament's monsoon session, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju said 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 who holds the charge of Parliamentary Affairs Ministry, said an inquiry committee will be set up by the presiding officer of the House concerned to probe charges against Justice 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 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."For Lok Sabha, signatures of a minimum 100 MPs is required. For the Rajya Sabha, the requirement is the support of at least 50 he added that the government is yet to decide whether the motion would be brought in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha."I have spoken to prominent opposition parties who have in principle agreed for his removal. We will follow the laid down procedure (for the process). The government wants matters related to judiciary to be beyond political lines and there should be consensus and unified stand," Rijiju further said the government will start collecting the signatures of MPs - after deciding which House should initiate the process - next Monsoon session will commence from July 21 and end on August said since the matter involves corruption in the judiciary, the government wants all political parties to be 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 the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his Sanjiv Khanna is believed to have prodded him to resign but Justice Varma dug in his apex court has since repatriated him to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial Khanna had written to the president and the PM, recommending the removal, which is the procedure for axing members of the higher judiciary from service.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
Centre to collect signatures of MPs for motion to remove Justice Varma
He said the government is yet to decide whether the motion would be brought in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha 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.
Time of India
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Govt to soon collect signatures of MPs for motion to remove Justice Yashwant Varma
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Popular in India 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 said the government is yet to decide whether the motion would be brought in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Lok Sabha, signatures of a minimum 100 MPs is required. For the Rajya Sabha, the requirement is the support of at least 50 said the signatures will be collected after the government decides on the House where the motion will be Monsoon session will commence from July 21 and end on August 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 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 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 judgeA 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 the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his Sanjiv Khanna is believed to have prodded him to resign but Justice Varma dug in his apex court has since repatriated him to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial 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.
Hindustan Times
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Cash row: Govt will reach out to opposition parties for removal of Justice Varma
Union parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju on Thursday said the government will reach out to opposition parties to seek the signatures of lawmakers in both Houses of Parliament to initiate the process of Justice Yashwant Varma's removal in the cash discovery row. The motion is expected to be moved in the upcoming session of parliament that begins on July 21. (PTI file photo) The minister said once the motion of removal with the requisite signatures is tabled in either House, the chair will constitute a committee to examine the charges of corruption against the sitting high court judge, which have been corroborated by a Supreme Court appointed committee. 'I have spoken to prominent opposition parties who have in principle agreed for his removal. We will follow the laid down procedure (for the process). The government wants matters related to judiciary should be beyond political lines and there should be consensus and unified stand,' he said. 'We will start the process of seeking signatures for the motion of removal. Once that is done, we will decide which house to submit it in,' Rijiju said. Also Read: Committee discusses judges' conduct, flags row over justice Varma For the removal of a sitting judge, the motion requires the signatures of 100 MPs in the Lok Sabha and 50 in the Rajya Sabha. The minister also said that the presiding officer of the House in which the motion is moved, will then set up a committee as per the required procedure. It was earlier indicated that Parliament may consider going with the report of the SC appointed committee, but the minister clarified that the report of that in-house probe committee cannot be tabled in Parliament. 'The earlier report was to see if it is a fit case for recommending it to the government. It was a preliminary one,' Rijiju said. 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 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. Listing the process for the removal of Justice Verma, he said the report of the committee constituted by the Chairman or the speaker as the case may be, will be tabled in Parliament and on that basis the discussion will start. Another person aware of the details said the government is exploring provisions to do away with the three-month tenure of the committee that will submit its report to Parliament. The government has clearly stated that it intends to bring a motion for the removal of Justice Verma from whose official residence currency was recovered during a fire in March this year. The motion is expected to be moved in the upcoming session of parliament that begins on July 21 and will end on August 21. While the opposition parties are also pushing for the removal of another sitting judge Justice Shekhar Yadav of the Allahabad HC, the government has sought to delink the two cases 'The case of Justice Yadav is not similar to that of Justice Verma… in the latter's case it is case of corruption involving the judiciary. It is above party politics…' said the second person quoted above. The motion for Justice Yadav's removal on ground of having made a hate speech at a function organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad is pending with the Rajya Sabha chairman. More than 50 MPs have signed the petition for his removal and the chairman, Jagdeep Dhankhar is expected to announce a ruling soon said people aware of the issue. On the decision to extend the upcoming monsoon session, the minister said, there is legislative business that has to be taken up, without providing specific details. An all-party meeting to discuss the business will be held on July 19 he said.
The Print
13-06-2025
- Politics
- The Print
Justice Varma row: Congress seeks SC-appointed panel's report to decide its stand on impeachment proposal
The government has indicated that it plans to bring an impeachment motion against Justice Varma during the monsoon session of Parliament which is slated to begin on 21 July. Congress sources told ThePrint that the party conveyed to the government that access to the committee's report was essential to determine its position on the proposed impeachment of Justice Varma, who is currently posted at the Allahabad High Court but has not been assigned any judicial work. New Delhi: The Congress has asked the Centre for the report of the Supreme Court-appointed committee investigating allegations of corruption against Justice Yashwant Varma. The Union government has informed the party of its decision to initiate impeachment proceedings against the judge, sources said Friday. On 14 March, wads of currency notes were discovered in a room at Justice Varma's official residence in New Delhi, while he was serving as a judge at the Delhi High Court. The incident sent shockwaves through judicial and political circles. Justice Varma was subsequently repatriated to the Allahabad High Court by the Supreme Court Collegium and has rejected the allegations against him in response to probes undertaken by the Delhi High Court chief justice and the SC committee. While the Congress has formally demanded the inquiry report of the SC committee, some of its legal brains have argued that the report of the panel could not be the sole basis to impeach the judge. The committee, set up by former Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna, comprised the chief justices of Punjab and Haryana and Himachal Pradesh, Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice GS Sandhawalia respectively, and Karnataka High court judge Justice Anu Sivaraman. The committee submitted its report on 3 May. On 8 May, days before his retirement, Justice Khanna wrote to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, enclosing a copy of the inquiry report and Justice Varma's response. Congress sources said that the party is consulting legal experts on the need to get the government to follow the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968 which kicks in once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the chambers of Parliament. Under the Act, the Speaker or the Chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (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'. In a public statement Wednesday, Congress Rajya Sabha MP Vivek Tankha also questioned the unavailability of the three-member SC committee report with MPs. 'Chairman Rajya Sabha, an eminent SC lawyer, is on record saying that the three judge inquiry report has no constitutional or legal sanctity. It's conducted for the benefit of CJI & SC judges. Not a legal material for parliamentarians to move a motion! Is the government short of legal advice?' Tankha asked. Earlier, when Dhankhar sought to make a case for the revival of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) citing the Justice Varma episode, the Congress had indicated that it was open to the idea of changes in the judicial appointments process. 'The recent incident of recovery of cash from the residence of a judge is indeed alarming. While the Congress Party recognises that an independent judiciary is intrinsic to protection of Constitutional principles and democracy, it is also true that Judiciary must set safeguards and standards for accountability. A mechanism for judicial accountability, without compromising judicial independence, is the need of the hour,' stated a resolution adopted by the All India Congress Committee at its session in Ahmedabad in April. (Edited by Viny Mishra) Also read: Hidden in plain sight: The unanswered questions in the Justice Varma cash controversy
