New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday orally remarked that there is "some infirmity" in the Lok Sabha Speaker's constitution of an inquiry committee to probe the accusations against justice Yashwant Varma.
A bench comprising justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma said that it will, however, consider whether the said infirmity is so grave as to warrant the termination of the proceedings initiated against justice Varma.
The chief contention raised by justice Varma in his plea is that despite impeachment notices being moved in both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla proceeded to constitute the committee unilaterally without awaiting the Rajya Sabha Chairman's decision on admission of the motion or holding the mandatory joint consultation prescribed by law.
Varma's counsel contended that under a proviso to Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, a joint consultation between the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman was contemplated in cases where the impeachment motion is raised in both Houses. Only thereafter can a probe committee be set up, he added.
Justice Datta asked whether any law prevents the Lok Sabha Speaker from setting up a probe committee after the Rajya Sabha Chairman rejects an impeachment motion, where such motions are raised in both Houses. The bench added that a joint committee is contemplated only if both Houses admit the impeachment motion.
"If one motion fails and one succeeds, then what happens? You said it will fail...if both Houses admit (the motion), then there is a joint committee. But if one rejects it, then where is the bar for Lok Sabha to appoint (a probe committee)? If one motion is not accepted, why should the motion of the other House fail," justice Datta asked Varma's counsel.
Justice Datta eventually remarked that he did not, prima facie, concur with the argument that an impeachment motion in the Lok Sabha must fail if a similar motion is rejected in the Rajya Sabha.
The hearing will resume on Thursday to examine whether justice Varma's rights were violated due to non-consultation between the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman before the probe committee was set up.
The court in December had issued notice to the Speaker as well as the secretariats of the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha on a plea filed by Allahabad High Court's justice Yashwant Varma, seeking quashing of the Speaker's decision to constitute a three-member panel against him under the Judges (Inquiry) Act for his impeachment.
A bench comprising justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma said that it will, however, consider whether the said infirmity is so grave as to warrant the termination of the proceedings initiated against justice Varma.
The chief contention raised by justice Varma in his plea is that despite impeachment notices being moved in both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla proceeded to constitute the committee unilaterally without awaiting the Rajya Sabha Chairman's decision on admission of the motion or holding the mandatory joint consultation prescribed by law.
Varma's counsel contended that under a proviso to Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, a joint consultation between the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman was contemplated in cases where the impeachment motion is raised in both Houses. Only thereafter can a probe committee be set up, he added.
Justice Datta asked whether any law prevents the Lok Sabha Speaker from setting up a probe committee after the Rajya Sabha Chairman rejects an impeachment motion, where such motions are raised in both Houses. The bench added that a joint committee is contemplated only if both Houses admit the impeachment motion.
"If one motion fails and one succeeds, then what happens? You said it will fail...if both Houses admit (the motion), then there is a joint committee. But if one rejects it, then where is the bar for Lok Sabha to appoint (a probe committee)? If one motion is not accepted, why should the motion of the other House fail," justice Datta asked Varma's counsel.
Justice Datta eventually remarked that he did not, prima facie, concur with the argument that an impeachment motion in the Lok Sabha must fail if a similar motion is rejected in the Rajya Sabha.
The hearing will resume on Thursday to examine whether justice Varma's rights were violated due to non-consultation between the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman before the probe committee was set up.
The court in December had issued notice to the Speaker as well as the secretariats of the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha on a plea filed by Allahabad High Court's justice Yashwant Varma, seeking quashing of the Speaker's decision to constitute a three-member panel against him under the Judges (Inquiry) Act for his impeachment.
