Judicial Accountability: Impeachment & In-House Inquiry Explained

Why in the News ?

Members of the INDIA bloc intend to submit an impeachment motion in Parliament against Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The move follows his direction to the Subramaniya Swamy Temple authorities to ensure the lighting of a lamp near a dargah during the Karthigai Deepam festival—an order that triggered political and constitutional debate.

Background & Context

• India’s Constitution provides very limited grounds and an extremely rigorous process for removing judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
• This strict design aims to ensure judicial independence, preventing the Executive or Legislature from misusing impeachment for political reasons.
• However, the absence of a mechanism to address less severe misconduct created a gap—leading to the Supreme Court formulating the In-House Procedure (1999).
• India has seen several attempted impeachments, but no judge has ever been successfully removed, largely due to the very high voting threshold and political complexities.
• The current controversy revives older debates on judicial accountability, institutional autonomy, and the need for reforms in disciplinary mechanisms for judges.

Impeachment Process for Judges in India

1. Constitutional & Legal Foundation

• Article 124(4): Provides the process for removal of Supreme Court judges.
• Article 218: Extends the same procedure to High Court judges.
• Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 provides the statutory framework.
• Grounds for removal:
  • Proved misbehaviour
  • Incapacity (physical or mental inability to discharge duties)

Note: The word “impeachment” is used in public discourse, though the Constitution does not explicitly use it for judges.

2. How the Impeachment Process Works

Step 1: Initiating the Motion

• Can be introduced in either House of Parliament.
• Requires support of:
  • 100 MPs in Lok Sabha or
  • 50 MPs in Rajya Sabha
• Motion proceeds only if Speaker/Chairman admits it.

Step 2: Inquiry Committee

Constituted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act.

Composition (3 members):

• A Supreme Court judge (or CJI)
• Chief Justice of a High Court
• An eminent jurist

Role:

• Conducts a quasi-judicial inquiry
• Examines evidence, witnesses, and written submissions
• Determines whether charges are proved

Step 3: Committee Report & Parliamentary Vote

• If the judge is found guilty, both Houses debate the motion.
• The motion must pass with a special majority:
  • 2/3rd of members present and voting, and
  • Majority of total membership of the House
• Upon approval, the President issues the removal order.

Limitations & Realities

• If the judge resigns during proceedings, the process typically ends.
• No judge has been removed in India so far due to the extremely high threshold.

In-House Inquiry Procedure (1999)

Origin

• Introduced by the Supreme Court following the C. Ravichandran Iyer vs Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee (1995) case.
• The case exposed the absence of a mechanism to address misconduct below impeachment level, prompting the judiciary to create an internal system.

Purpose

• To examine complaints of misconduct not grave enough for impeachment, but serious enough to require scrutiny.
• Preserves judicial independence while enabling institutional self-regulation.

How the In-House Process Works                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

1. Screening of Complaints

• Complaints are reviewed by:
• Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, or
• Chief Justice of India (CJI)
• Frivolous or baseless complaints are discarded.
• Serious allegations require a written response from the judge.

2. Constitution of Inquiry Committee

If further inquiry is needed, the CJI constitutes a committee:

For a High Court Judge:

• 2 Chief Justices of other High Courts
• 1 High Court Judge

For a High Court Chief Justice:

• 1 Supreme Court Judge
• 2 High Court Chief Justices

For a Supreme Court Judge:

• 3 Supreme Court Judges

For the CJI:

• No specific in-house mechanism exists.

3. Inquiry Process

• Conducted with adherence to natural justice.
• Judge is given full opportunity to respond, submit documents, and be heard.

4. Outcomes

• If misconduct is proved:
  • Judge may be advised to resign or take voluntary retirement.
  • If refused, the CJI may recommend impeachment.
• If misconduct is minor:
  • Judge is cautioned; report kept on record.