DMK, opposition MPs seek impeachment of Madras High Court Justice GR Swaminathan over bias, anti-secular decisions

107 Members of Parliament (MPs) from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and other opposition parties have moved a motion in Parliament to impeach Madras High Court judge Justice GR Swaminathan. .The impeachment motion moved in the Lok Sabha alleged that Justice Swaminathan has been deciding cases on the basis of a "particular political ideology" and against the secular principles of the Constitution of India. The MPs have sought the judge's impeachment, calling into question his conduct with respect to impartiality and transparency.The motion also stated that Justice Swaminathan has been showing undue favouritism to Senior Advocate M Sricharan Ranganathan as well as other lawyers from "a particular community" while deciding cases. .Among the signatories to the impeachment motion are DMK leaders TR Baalu, A Raja, Kanimozhi and Dayanidhi Maran, Congress leaders Priyanka Gandhi and Gaurav Gogoi, Samajwadi Party leaders Akhilesh Yadav and Dimple Yadav, and AIMIM's Asaduddin Owaisi.These developments come close on the heels of Justice Swaminathan's order permitting devotees of the Arulmigu Subramania Swamy temple to light the Karthigai Deepam lamp (to mark the Hindu festival of lights) on the deepathoon (stone lamp pillar) atop the Thirupparankundram hillock, which is near a Dargah. The order was opposed by the State government and the issue has reached the Supreme Court.The hillock in focus houses the Sikkandar Badhusha Dargha, as well as the Arulmigu Subramania Swamy temple.Devotees of the temple had moved the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court seeking directions so that the Karthigai deepam is lit on the deepathoon atop one of the hillock's summits.On December 1, Justice Swaminathan held that the temple is obliged to light this lamp at the deepathoon in addition to lighting the lamp at an existing site near the Uchi Pillaiyar Mandapam.The single-judge concluded that the light of the lamp at the deepathon would not violate the rights of the nearby dargah or Muslims in any way.Later, the judge found that this order was not complied with. Therefore, on December 3, the single-judge passed another order permitting devotees themselves to light the lamp. He also ordered that the petitioners and other devotees be given protection by the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) attached to the Madurai Bench of the High Court..This December 3 ruling was challenged by the District Collector and the City Police Commissioner first before a Division Bench of the High Court, which refused to overturn the single-judge's directions.The Division Bench of Justices G Jayachandran and KK Ramakrishnan observed that there was no illegality in ordering CISF protection when the single-judge found that the State machinery had wilfully decided not to implement the directions in the December 1 order.The district authorities then moved the Supreme Court, challenging these orders.The contempt petition filed by devotees over non-compliance with the single-judge order is pending before the High Court. Justice Swaminathan is slated to hear this contempt case next on December 17. .Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.