The top court also denied tainted Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma an extension of time for filing his response before the Parliamentary Committee.
A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice S C Sharma expressed doubts over the submission that proceedings before the Lok Sabha would fall, if the impeachment motion is not admitted by the Rajya Sabha while hearing Justice Varma’s petition challenging the decision of Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to constitute a three-member inquiry committee under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, to examine allegations against him.
“So many MPs and legal experts, but no one pointed this out?” Justice Datta remarked during the hearing, expressing surprise over the procedural lapse highlighted in the petition.
The committee will submit its report as early as possible, Speaker Birla said.
The court also observed that “Your (Justice Varma’s) conduct does not inspire confidence”.
The action stems from the alleged recovery of unaccounted cash at his official residence in Delhi on March 14, this year.
Seeking the quashing of the three-judge committee’s May 3 report and of the former CJI’s communication recommending his removal, Justice Verma in his petition has stated that the inquiry was triggered without a formal complaint, conducted in a manner that violated basic fairness, and then used to push an outcome the Constitution reserves exclusively to Parliament.
The impeachment motion against a sitting High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma, is more than a test of an individual’s integrity — it is a test of the Indian judiciary’s moral spine and the political class’s will to act above partisan instincts.
Until the ongoing investigation against him is completed, he has been kept away from judicial work.
The Allahabad High Court is the parent high court of Justice Verma where initially he was appointed as an Additional judge and later confirmed as a permanent judge.
