WhatsApp Channel Join Now
Telegram Group Join Now

Relevance: GS-II (Indian Constitution, Structure and Functioning of the Judiciary, Parliament) Source: Parliamentary Inquiry Reports, 2026

1 · What is the Case?

Judges are the ultimate protectors of the law, making judicial accountability a cornerstone of our democracy. Recently, a fire broke out at the official Delhi residence of a High Court judge. During the rescue, firefighters discovered a large stash of partially burnt currency notes hidden in a storeroom.

This discovery led to a serious constitutional process. Members of Parliament (MPs) moved a motion for his removal, and a high-level inquiry committee was established. Even though the judge abruptly resigned mid-way to avoid the probe, the committee concluded its investigation, finding him guilty of possessing unaccounted wealth and destroying evidence.

2 · The Constitutional Removal Process

Step 1: The Parliamentary Motion
Following the discovery of the cash, nearly 200 MPs submitted a formal motion to the Lok Sabha Speaker, demanding the judge’s removal on the grounds of “proved misbehaviour.”
▼
Step 2: The Statutory Inquiry
Acting strictly under the law, the Speaker constituted a three-member committee—headed by a Supreme Court judge—to impartially investigate the allegations.
▼
Step 3: The Abrupt Resignation
Instead of defending himself in the witness box, the judge submitted his resignation to the President, claiming the inquiry was procedurally unfair and biased against him.
▼
Step 4: Setting a New Precedent
The committee ruled that a judge cannot unilaterally derail an inquiry by resigning mid-way. They completed the probe and officially found all charges of misconduct to be proved.

3 · Key Legal Concepts

Articles 124(4) & 218
The Shield of Independence
To ensure judges operate without political fear, the Constitution dictates they can only be removed by the President after both Houses of Parliament pass a motion with a special majority.
Grounds for Removal
Proved Misbehaviour
A judge cannot be dismissed over simple disagreements. The Constitution restricts removal strictly to cases of “proved misbehaviour” (like corruption) or physical/mental “incapacity.”
Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968
The Investigative Panel
This specific Act mandates that the investigating committee must comprise exactly three members: a sitting Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice, and a distinguished jurist.
The Resignation Loophole
Infructuous Motions
Historically, judges facing removal often resign before Parliament can formally vote. This strategy generally renders the entire legislative impeachment process useless or “infructuous.”

UPSC Prelims Quick Facts: The Mechanics of Impeachment
Initiating the Motion A removal motion must be officially signed by at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha to be considered valid.
The Speaker’s Power The presiding officer (the Speaker in the Lok Sabha or the Chairman in the Rajya Sabha) holds the absolute discretion to either admit the motion for investigation or reject it entirely.
Historical Precedents India has witnessed similar constitutional dramas before. Justice V. Ramaswami (1993) and Justice Soumitra Sen (2011) both resigned to avoid formal parliamentary removal.
Accountability Triumphs The recent committee report strongly affirmed that high constitutional officeholders cannot use the tactic of sudden resignation to erase evidence of misconduct once a probe has commenced.

MCQ Practice Question
Q. With reference to the constitutional procedure for the removal of a High Court Judge in India, consider the following statements:

  1. A motion seeking the removal of a judge can be introduced in the Lok Sabha only if it is supported by a minimum of 100 members.
  2. A High Court judge can be formally removed from office by a direct order of the State Governor on the grounds of proved misbehaviour.
  3. The inquiry committee constituted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, must consist of exactly three members.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only    (b) 1 and 3 only    (c) 3 only    (d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (b) 1 and 3 only

  • Statement 1 — Correct: The Judges (Inquiry) Act clearly specifies that a removal motion requires the signatures of at least 100 members in the Lok Sabha, or 50 members if introduced in the Rajya Sabha.
  • Statement 2 — Incorrect: A High Court judge can only be removed by an order of the President of India (following a special majority vote in both Houses of Parliament). The State Governor has no constitutional authority in this removal process.
  • Statement 3 — Correct: The statutory investigating panel is strictly a three-member body, comprising a Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice, and an eminent jurist.
Ajmal IAS APSC Foundation Course

Recent Posts

Ajmal IAS APSC Foundation BATCH
Ajmal IAS APSC Foundation Course

Start Yours at Ajmal IAS – with Mentorship StrategyDisciplineClarityResults that Drives Success

Your dream deserves this moment — begin it here.