CivilsWisdom.
Updated · Today
Polity & Governance May 18, 2026 3 min read Daily brief · #6 of 34

Inquiry committee probing allegations against Justice Varma submits report to Speaker

The Judges Inquiry Committee investigating Justice Yashwant Varma submitted its statutory report to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on May 18, 2026, following a p...

GS Paper 2

What Happened

  • The Judges Inquiry Committee investigating Justice Yashwant Varma submitted its statutory report to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on May 18, 2026, following a probe into the alleged cash recovery at his official residence.
  • Officials confirmed the report will be presented to both Houses of Parliament in due course, fulfilling the requirement under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
  • The committee's mandate was to examine whether grounds existed for Justice Varma's removal under Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India.
  • The submission follows Justice Varma's resignation from the Allahabad High Court on April 9, 2026 — a development without clear constitutional precedent in the Indian impeachment framework, since the Constitution addresses only the removal of sitting judges.
  • The parliamentary presentation is likely to take place during the monsoon session of Parliament in July 2026.

Static Topic Bridges

Constitutional Framework for Judicial Removal: Articles 124(4) and 124(5)

Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India provides that a Judge of the Supreme Court shall not be removed from office except by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting, on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Article 124(5) authorises Parliament to regulate the investigation and proof of such misbehaviour or incapacity, the power under which the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 was enacted. Article 218 makes these provisions applicable to High Court judges.

  • "Proved misbehaviour or incapacity" is the constitutional standard — the inquiry committee determines whether this threshold is met.
  • The President acts on the address of Parliament; the President has no independent discretion to remove or retain a judge.
  • No judge has ever been removed through the full constitutional process since independence; the V. Ramaswami impeachment motion in 1993 failed in Lok Sabha for lack of the required majority.
  • The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 — derived from Article 124(5) — sets up the three-member committee, evidence procedures, and rights of the judge under inquiry.

Connection to this news: The inquiry committee has completed its function under the Act and submitted the report, which is the statutory precondition for Parliament to deliberate on whether to pass a removal address.

Parliamentary Procedure for Judicial Impeachment

Once the Judges Inquiry Committee report is received, the Speaker (or Chairman in Rajya Sabha) causes it to be presented before the respective House. The House then debates whether to proceed with voting on the address. The address must pass both Houses with special majorities in the same session before being sent to the President for an order of removal.

  • The inquiry report does not automatically result in removal; Parliament exercises independent judgment on the committee's findings.
  • Either House can independently decide not to pass the address, defeating the motion.
  • The same session requirement means if Lok Sabha passes the address but Rajya Sabha does not in the same session, the process must restart.
  • Justice K. Veeraswami (1991, Supreme Court ruling) established that a sitting judge cannot be subjected to criminal prosecution without the Chief Justice's concurrence, reinforcing the primacy of the constitutional removal procedure.

Connection to this news: The report presentation before Parliament will be the next formal step; the proceedings will test how constitutional provisions respond to the novel situation of a judge resigning after the inquiry committee has completed its work.

Key Facts & Data

  • Governing constitutional provision: Article 124(4) (removal of SC judges), extended to HC judges by Article 218
  • Statutory authority: Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 (enacted under Article 124(5))
  • Inquiry committee submitted report to: Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, May 18, 2026
  • Justice Varma's resignation: April 9, 2026 (addressed to President of India)
  • Alleged cash recovery incident: March 14, 2025 (fire at official Delhi residence)
  • Only judicial removal attempt in independent India that reached Parliament: Justice V. Ramaswami, 1993 — motion failed in Lok Sabha
  • Special majority required: Absolute majority of total membership + two-thirds of members present and voting in each House
  • Next parliamentary step: Presentation before both Houses, expected monsoon session July 2026
On this page
  1. What Happened
  2. Static Topic Bridges
  3. Constitutional Framework for Judicial Removal: Articles 124(4) and 124(5)
  4. Parliamentary Procedure for Judicial Impeachment
  5. Key Facts & Data
Display