"Plea Not Worth Entertaining": Supreme Court Setback For Judge In Cash Row

The Supreme Court has knocked back Justice Yashwant Varma's challenge to an in-house committee that recommended his impeachment over burnt piles of money found at his Delhi home in March.

The recommendation - delivered by then-Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna- has legal sanction and is constitutionally valid, as was the three-judge committee, the court said Thursday morning, ruling Justice Varma's petition "not worth entertaining" and reproaching him for his not "confidence-inspiring" conduct.

This clears the way for the impeachment process initiated last month.

Over 145 MPs - from the opposition and the government's ranks - submitted a notice to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla calling for an investigation into Justice Varma and the cash-at-home row.

Justice Varma - who could become the first High Court judge in independent India to be removed from office - will now be investigated by Parliament under Articles 124, 217, and 218 of the Constitution.

'Why I Can't Be Impeached': Justice Varma

In his writ petition Justice Varma, listed as 'XXX' in the records, had offered the two-judge bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and AG Masih five reasons why he could not be sacked. These included questions over the jurisdiction and authority of the in-house committee to investigate a sitting judge.

READ | Justice Yashwant Varma's 5 Reasons Why He Shouldn't Be Impeached

Justice Varma argued the committee ignored questions he had raised and denied him a fair hearing. He also argued the Supreme Court did not have 'power of superintendence', i.e., they cannot take disciplinary action against High Court judges, because their tenure is protected by the Constitution.

He also argued his colleagues' recommendation "usurps parliamentary authority... it empowers the judiciary to recommend removal of Judges from constitutionally-held office".

Those arguments have now been rejected by the Supreme Court.

'Why Didn't You Come Earlier?'

During the hearing on July 28 the top court posed questions of its own to Justice Varma.

The court asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Justice Varma, why his client did not challenge the in-house inquiry prior to his appearance before the committee. The court pointed out that if Justice Varma truly believed the committee to be illegal he should have filed his challenge then.

"There have been instances in which judges abstained from appearing before such panels... why did you appear? Did you think they were going to pass a favourable decision? You're a constitutional authority. You can't say that you didn't know. You should have immediately come to this court."

What Is Impeachment?

It is a constitutional mechanism to remove a sitting judge - specifically those from the Supreme Court or a state High Court - from his/her office. Once appointed, judges cannot be removed from office without an order from the President, who, in turn, requires consent from Parliament.

NDTV Explains | How Do You Remove A Sitting Judge? Impeachment Explained

The Constitution does not actually refer to the word 'impeachment', but the procedure to remove judges is outlined in the Judges Inquiry Act of 1968 and mentioned in two constitutional provisions - Article 124 (for Supreme Court judges) and Article 218 (for those from High Courts).

How Is Impeachment Done?

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

At least 50 Rajya Sabha MPs must sign the motion - which is a record of the intention to impeach - for it to proceed further. In the Lok Sabha that number is 100.

Once that threshold is reached, the Chair of the former or the Speaker of the latter, depending on which House admits the motion, will review the available materials.

Justice Varma Cash-At-Home Case

The controversy broke on March 15. Firefighters called to the judge's bungalow in central Delhi discovered piles of money that had been burnt by a fire that spread from the main building.

Justice Varma has denied any link to the cash, and labelled allegations of impropriety against him and members of his family "preposterous". He has also claimed a 'conspiracy' against him.

READ | In Cash-At-Home Case, Justice Varma's 5 Anti-Impeachment Reasons

However, the discovery of the burnt cash triggered a massive row that included questions about corruption in the highest levels of the judicial system. In response the Supreme Court set up an in-house panel that recommended the impeachment of Justice Yashwant Varma.

That report was forwarded to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi - by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna - with the same recommendation.

READ | "Proof Cash Found At Justice Varma's Home": Probe Panel's Findings

Among other points, the 64-page document, accessed by NDTV, highlighted the fact that access to the outhouse in which the money was found was maintained by the judge and his family".

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.