The Supreme Court on Wednesday said Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla cannot be barred from setting up an inquiry committee to investigate corruption allegations against Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma. The oral observation came during a hearing on the matter, with the court noting that the Judges Inquiry Act does not bar the Speaker from forming such a panel, even after a similar motion was rejected in the Rajya Sabha.
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma said, prima facie, they did not agree with senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi’s argument that the Rajya Sabha’s deputy chairperson lacked the authority to reject the motion following the resignation of the House’s Chairman, Jagdeep Dhankhar.
However, the Supreme Court also pointed out that there seemed to be “some infirmity” in the way the Lok Sabha Speaker constituted the inquiry committee. The court indicated it would examine whether this procedural defect is serious enough to halt the ongoing proceedings.
Rohatgi, representing Justice Varma, opposed the formation of the Lok Sabha panel, arguing that when impeachment motions are moved in both houses on the same day, the inquiry committee must be set up jointly by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
Justice Verma had moved the top court against setting up of an inquiry committee by the Lok Sabha Speaker to probe corruption charges against him.
About the case
Justice Varma was repatriated to the Allahabad High Court after burnt currency notes were found at his official residence on March 14 last year. Following this, then CJI Sanjiv Khanna initiated an in-house inquiry, constituting a three-member committee which, on May 4, found Justice Varma guilty of misconduct. After he declined to resign, the report and his response were forwarded to the President and Prime Minister, paving the way for impeachment proceedings.
On August 12, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla admitted a multi-party motion for his removal and formed another three-member inquiry committee. Justice Varma has challenged the Speaker’s actions and the inquiry process, seeking to quash the motion and notices, arguing that the proceedings violate the Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
