New Delhi:
An impeachment motion against Justice Varma of the High Court may soon be tabled in the Rajya Sabha during the current session of Parliament, government and parliamentary sources have confirmed. The proposal, if formally introduced, would mark a rare and significant development in India’s judicial and legislative history.
The motion is reportedly being prepared by a coalition of opposition parties who have cited serious allegations of judicial impropriety, misuse of office, and violation of constitutional responsibilities. Though the contents of the charges have not yet been made public, members involved in the process suggest that the charges are based on documented evidence and have undergone initial legal scrutiny.
To initiate impeachment proceedings against a judge of the High Court or Supreme Court, a motion must be signed by at least 50 Rajya Sabha members or 100 Lok Sabha members, as per Article 124(4) and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. If the Rajya Sabha Chairperson finds the motion to be in order, an investigative committee is formed to look into the charges.
According to sources, consultations have already begun among key opposition leaders to finalize the language of the motion. They are expected to submit the signed document to the Rajya Sabha Chairperson within the next few days. Parliamentary Affairs experts note that this process could gain momentum quickly if political consensus is reached.
This would be among the very few impeachment attempts in Indian history. Previous motions, such as those against Justice V. Ramaswami in 1993 and Justice Soumitra Sen in 2011, serve as important precedents. In both cases, political maneuvering and legal complexities played major roles in the final outcome. While Justice Ramaswami escaped impeachment due to abstentions in Parliament, Justice Sen resigned before the Lok Sabha vote.
The central government has not yet made an official statement regarding this latest development. However, legal experts suggest that such motions are always politically sensitive and must be handled with strict adherence to constitutional norms. They also warn against politicizing the judiciary, noting that the independence of the judicial branch must remain protected even during times of scrutiny.
Supporters of the motion argue that Parliament has a responsibility to maintain the integrity of the judiciary by holding judges accountable when serious allegations are made. “We are not targeting the judiciary, but upholding democratic checks and balances,” one opposition leader remarked.
On the other hand, critics argue that the timing and motivation behind the motion could be politically driven, especially during a session that has already seen heated exchanges between ruling and opposition members over other issues.
If the motion is accepted, a three-member committee comprising a Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice, and a legal expert will investigate the charges. Based on their findings, the House will vote on whether to proceed with impeachment.
This potential impeachment move is expected to dominate political and media discussions in the coming days as both supporters and opponents prepare for what could be a historic parliamentary event.
