Judicial Probity: Removal of Judges, Impeachment Process & Challenges

Allahabad High Court Justice Yashwant Varma, facing a Parliamentary motion for his removal, submitted his resignation to the President of India.

• The resignation comes in the backdrop of serious allegations regarding judicial misconduct and lack of probity.
• A panel was constituted by the Speaker of Lok Sabha under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 to investigate the matter.
• The inquiry pertains to reports of burnt cash allegedly recovered from the judge’s official residence in Delhi following a fire incident last year.

Best Online Coaching for UPSC

About Judicial Probity

• Judicial probity refers to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, impartiality, and ethical conduct expected from judges.
• It implies that judges must act without bias, favour, or personal interest, ensuring fairness in every decision. 
• Judicial probity is rooted in the principle that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done.
• Example Illustrating Judicial Probity: 
  • Recusal to Avoid Conflict of Interest: A judge voluntarily recuses from a case where there is a personal or professional connection.
    • For Example: Judges of the Supreme Court of India have recused themselves in cases involving former colleagues or relatives to maintain impartiality.

Core Elements of Judicial Probity

• Integrity: Judges must remain morally upright and incorruptible, both in public and private life.
  • Even the perception of misconduct can undermine the institution.
• Impartiality: Decisions should be based solely on facts and law, free from external pressures such as political, social, or economic influences.
• Independence: The judiciary must function independently of the executive and legislature, a principle embedded in the Constitution of India.
• Accountability: While independent, judges are also answerable for misconduct through constitutional mechanisms like impeachment.
• Propriety in Conduct: Judges must maintain dignified behaviour and avoid conflicts of interest to preserve the sanctity of their office.

Constitutional Provisions for Removal of Judges

• Article 124: Deals with the appointment and removal of Supreme Court judges through an impeachment process requiring a special majority in Parliament.
• Article 217: Pertains to the appointment and removal of High Court judges.

UPSC Coaching Classes

Procedure for Removal of a High Court Judge under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968

• Initiation of Motion: A motion for the removal of a High Court judge must be signed by at least 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members.
• Admission of Motion: The Speaker (Lok Sabha) or Chairman (Rajya Sabha) may admit or refuse the motion after due consideration. 
• Constitution of Inquiry Committee: Upon admission, a three-member committee is formed, comprising:
  • A Supreme Court judge,
  • A Chief Justice of a High Court, and
  • A distinguished jurist. 
• Investigation Process: The committee frames specific charges, provides the judge an opportunity to respond, and may recommend a medical examination if incapacity is alleged.
• Committee Report: If the judge is found not guilty, the motion is dropped. If found guilty, the report is presented to Parliament. 
• Parliamentary Approval: Both Houses must pass the motion with a special majority (majority of total membership and two-thirds of members present and voting).
• Presidential Assent: Following parliamentary approval, an address is presented to the President, who then orders the judge’s removal.

Importance of Judicial Probity

• Upholds Rule of Law: Judicial probity ensures that laws are applied fairly and consistently, reinforcing the rule of law as envisaged in the Constitution of India.
• Builds Public Confidence: High standards of integrity and impartiality enhance trust of citizens in the judiciary, which is essential for a functioning democracy.
• Ensures Fair and Impartial Justice: It guarantees that decisions are made without bias or external influence, ensuring justice for all
• Strengthens Judicial Independence: Probity protects the judiciary from undue influence of the executive, legislature, or private interests, preserving its independence.
• Maintains Institutional Credibility: Ethical conduct by judges safeguards the credibility and legitimacy of the judicial system, preventing erosion of its authority.
• Prevents Judicial Corruption: Judicial probity acts as a safeguard against corruption and misuse of judicial authority, ensuring decisions remain fair and lawful.

Challenges

• Lack of Transparent Accountability Mechanisms: The impeachment process is lengthy, complex, and rarely invoked, leading to limited accountability in practice.
  • Example: Very few judges in India have been successfully impeached despite allegations.
• Institutional Hesitation: The judiciary often shows institutional reluctance to act against its own members, affecting internal discipline.
  • Example: Delays in initiating in-house inquiries in cases of alleged misconduct.
• Political Influence in Impeachment Process: Since removal requires Parliamentary approval, political considerations may influence outcomes.
  • Past impeachment motions failing due to lack of political consensus rather than merit.
• Erosion of Public Trust: Allegations of misconduct without timely resolution can undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
  • Controversies involving judges create perception issues even before guilt is established.
• Absence of a Dedicated Oversight Body: India lacks an independent statutory authority exclusively mandated to handle complaints against judges, leading to gaps in accountability.
  • For Example: Unlike several democracies with dedicated judicial councils, oversight in India remains fragmented and largely internal.
• Delay in Inquiry and Adjudication: Investigations and impeachment-related proceedings often suffer from significant delays, reducing their effectiveness as a deterrent.
  • Prolonged inquiries dilute accountability and allow allegations to remain unresolved for extended periods.

Click to Know UPSC Offline Courses

Way Forward

• Strengthening In-House Mechanisms:  Establish robust internal ethics committees within the judiciary for faster resolution of complaints.
• Enhancing Transparency in Proceedings: Ensure time-bound and transparent inquiry processes to maintain public confidence.
  • Public disclosure of inquiry outcomes, while safeguarding judicial independence.
• Institutional Reforms for Accountability: Consider setting up a National Judicial Council to independently handle complaints against judges.
• Balancing Independence with Accountability: Develop mechanisms that preserve judicial independence while ensuring accountability.
  • For Example: Clear guidelines Should be incorporated on judicial conduct and conflict of interest under the Constitution of India.
• Codification of Judicial Ethics: There is a need to develop a comprehensive and enforceable code of conduct for judges to ensure uniform ethical standards across the judiciary.
• Use of Technology and Digital Transparency: Leveraging technology can improve transparency and efficiency in handling complaints and monitoring judicial proceedings.
  • For Example: Establishing online portals for filing complaints and tracking their status can ensure time-bound resolution and greater public trust.

Judicial Probity (Related Concept)

Check Out UPSC CSE Books

Visit PW Store

DOWNLOAD PDF