Impeachment Motion

Members of Parliament from the INDIA bloc have proposed to move an impeachment motion in Parliament against Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court.
This move follows a judicial order directing the Subramaniya Swamy Temple authorities to ensure the lighting of a lamp at the deepathoon (pillar) near a dargah during the Karthigai Deepam festival, which has generated political and legal controversy.

Judicial Impeachment in India: Concept

Although the word “impeachment” is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it refers to the formal constitutional process for removing a Supreme Court or High Court judge.
The process is meant to ensure judicial accountability while simultaneously protecting judicial independence from political interference.

Judges can be removed only on two grounds:

• Proved misbehaviour, which includes serious ethical or professional misconduct, and

• Incapacity, meaning the inability to perform judicial duties due to physical or mental reasons.

Constitutional and Legal Basis

• Article 124(4) of the Constitution provides the procedure for removal of Supreme Court judges.

• Article 218 extends the same procedure to High Court judges.

• The detailed mechanism is laid down in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

Impeachment Process for Judges in India

1. Initiation of the Motion

An impeachment motion can be introduced in either House of Parliament:

• It must be supported by at least 100 MPs in the Lok Sabha, or

• At least 50 MPs in the Rajya Sabha.

The motion proceeds only after being admitted by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, as applicable.

2. Constitution of the Inquiry Committee

Once admitted, a three-member inquiry committee is constituted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. It consists of:

• A Supreme Court judge (or the Chief Justice of India),

• A Chief Justice of a High Court, and

• An eminent jurist.

The committee functions as a quasi-judicial body and conducts a detailed inquiry into the charges.

3. Committee Report and Parliamentary Approval

• The inquiry committee submits its report to the House where the motion was initiated.

• If the judge is found guilty of proved misbehaviour or incapacity, the motion is taken up for debate.

• The motion must be passed in both Houses of Parliament by a special majority, which includes:

  • A majority of the total membership, and

  • At least two-thirds of the members present and voting.

4. Final Removal

After both Houses pass the motion, the President of India issues the final order of removal.

Limitations and Drawbacks of the Impeachment Process

• If a judge resigns or retires during the process, the impeachment proceedings usually come to an end.

• No judge has been successfully impeached in India so far.

• The very high voting threshold makes removal extremely difficult and rare.

In-House Inquiry Procedure for Judges

Origin and Rationale

The Supreme Court introduced the in-house inquiry mechanism in 1999.
This followed the C. Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee (1995) case, which exposed the absence of a mechanism to deal with judicial misconduct that does not meet the high threshold of impeachment.

The in-house procedure aims to bridge the gap between minor misconduct and “proved misbehaviour” under Articles 124 and 218.

Stages of the In-House Inquiry Procedure

1. Screening of Complaints

• Complaints are initially examined by the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court or directly by the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

• Frivolous or baseless complaints are rejected at the preliminary stage.

• Serious complaints require a written response from the judge concerned.

2. Constitution of the Inquiry Committee

If further inquiry is required, the CJI constitutes a three-member committee, depending on the position of the judge:

• High Court Judge:

  • Two Chief Justices of other High Courts and one High Court judge.

• Chief Justice of a High Court:

  • One Supreme Court judge and two High Court Chief Justices.

• Supreme Court Judge:

  • Three Supreme Court judges.

• Chief Justice of India:

  • No specific in-house procedure is defined.

The committee conducts the inquiry following the principles of natural justice, allowing the judge to present a defence.

Possible Outcomes of the In-House Inquiry

• If misconduct is proved:

  • The judge may be advised to resign or take voluntary retirement.

  • If the judge refuses, they may be relieved of judicial work, and in serious cases, the CJI may recommend impeachment.

• If misconduct is minor:

  • The judge may be cautioned or advised, and the findings are placed on record.

Conclusion

The proposed impeachment motion against a High Court judge brings into focus the delicate balance between judicial accountability and judicial independence. While the constitutional impeachment mechanism ensures protection against arbitrary removal, its rigidity has led to the development of the in-house inquiry system to address misconduct below the impeachment threshold. Together, both mechanisms form the backbone of judicial discipline in India’s constitutional framework.