The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a plea by Allahabad High Court Justice Yashwant Varma to quash the Lok Sabha Speaker's decision to constitute a three-member committee against him under the Judges (Inquiry) Act for his impeachment..A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma passed the ruling after reserving its verdict on January 8..A fire at Justice Varma's house on March 14, 2025, had led to the recovery of unaccounted cash by firefighters and triggered allegations of corruption against the judge.Justice Varma denied the accusations, but was transferred to his parent High Court of Allahabad from the Delhi High Court, and stripped of judicial work while further action was contemplated.Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna (who has since retired) initiated an in-house probe into the matter, and eventually asked Justice Varma to resign or face impeachment proceedings. Justice Varma declined to quit his office.In August, the Lok Sabha Speaker initiated the process to remove Justice Varma from his position as a High Court judge, after admitting a motion by Members of Parliament (MPs) to impeach the judge.The Speaker constituted a three-member committee to probe the incident under the Judges (Inquiry) Act.Justice Varma then challenged these proceedings before the Supreme Court..Varma challenged the Lok Sabha Speaker's decision on procedural grounds. He highlighted that although the notices for his impeachment were given in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, Lok Sabha speaker Om Birla constituted a probe committee unilaterally without awaiting admission of the motion by the Rajya Sabha chairman.His counsel contended that under a proviso to Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, a joint consultation between the Lok Sabha Speaker and the Rajya Sabha Chairman is contemplated when the impeachment motion is raised in both Houses.Only thereafter can a probe committee be set up, Varma's counsel argued..The Lok Sabha's Secretary General countered that the Rajya Sabha did not admit the impeachment motion, meaning that the proviso would not apply. He submitted that the impeachment motion was rejected by the Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman on August 11, 2025, after the Chairman (then Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar) resigned in July.The Lok Sabha's Secretary General, therefore, contended that the Lok Sabha Speaker was well within his powers to independently continue the impeachment process.During hearings of the matter, the Court had questioned whether there was any law preventing the Lok Sabha Speaker from continuing impeachment proceedings against Varma merely because the Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman may have rejected such a motion on the same day.The Court had also expressed prima facie disagreement with a view that in such cases, the impeachment motion would fail..Senior Advocates Sidharth Luthra, Mukul Rohatgi and Jayant Mehta appeared for Justice Varma..Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta represented the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha functionaries..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
