4 months ago
2
The Supreme Court connected Thursday (January 8, 2026) reserved its verdict connected a plea of Allahabad High Court justice Yashwant Varma challenging the legality of the parliamentary sheet probing corruption charges against him.
A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma reserved its determination aft proceeding elder advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Varma and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing some houses of Parliament.
During the hearing, Rohtagi and Luthra questioned the process adopted successful mounting up the parliamentary sheet and said nether the Judges (inquiry) Act of 1968, lone the Speaker of Lok Sabha and president of Rajya Sabha are entitled to admit the question for removal of a justice from office.
Mr. Mehta defended the constitution of the parliamentary panel, and said if the question has been admitted successful some the houses past the enquiry committee shall beryllium jointly constituted by the talker and the chairman.
On Wednesday (January 7, 2026), the apical tribunal orally observed that determination was nary barroom nether the Judges Inquiry Act connected Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla mounting up an enquiry committee to probe corruption charges against Varma aft a akin question was rejected successful the Rajya Sabha.
Justice Varma was repatriated from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court aft burnt wads of currency notes were recovered astatine his authoritative residence successful New Delhi connected March 14.
The apical tribunal had connected December 16 agreed to perceive Justice Varma’s plea challenging the constitution of the enquiry committee and issued notices to the bureau of Lok Sabha Speaker and the secretaries wide of some Houses of Parliament.
Earlier, past Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had initiated an in-house enquiry and constituted a three-member committee comprising Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, Himachal Pradesh High Court Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, and Karnataka High Court Justice Anu Sivaraman.
The committee submitted its study connected May 4, uncovering Justice Varma blameworthy of misconduct.
After Justice Varma declined to resign, the CJI forwarded the study and the Judge's effect to the President and the premier minister, mounting the signifier for impeachment proceedings.
Also Read | Supreme Court’s in-house enquiry usurps Parliament’s authority, erodes judicial independence: Justice Varma
Subsequently, Birla admitted a multi-party question for Justice Varma’s removal connected August 12 and constituted a three-member enquiry committee comprising Supreme Court justice Justice Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, and elder advocator B V Acharya.
Justice Varma has sought quashing of the Speaker's action, the admittance of the motion, and each consequential notices issued by the enquiry committee, contending that the full process is unconstitutional and contrary to the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
