SC reserves verdict on plea of Justice Varma assailing validity of inquiry panel by LS

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a plea of Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma challenging the legality of the parliamentary panel probing corruption charges against him. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma reserved its decision after hearing senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Varma and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing both houses of Parliament.

During the hearing, Rohtagi and Luthra questioned the procedure adopted in setting up the parliamentary panel and said under the Judges (inquiry) Act of 1968, only the Speaker of Lok Sabha and the chairman of Rajya Sabha are entitled to admit the motion for removal of a judge from office. Mehta defended the constitution of the parliamentary panel, and said that if the motion has been admitted in both the houses, then the inquiry committee shall be jointly constituted by the speaker and the chairman.

On Wednesday, the top court orally observed that there was no bar under the Judges Inquiry Act on Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla setting up an inquiry committee to probe corruption charges against Varma after a similar motion was rejected in the Rajya Sabha.

Justice Varma was repatriated from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court after burnt wads of currency notes were found at his official residence in New Delhi on March 14. The top court had on December 16 agreed to hear Justice Varma’s plea challenging the constitution of the inquiry committee and issued notices to the office of Lok Sabha Speaker and the secretaries general of both Houses of Parliament.

Justice Varma has sought quashing of the Speaker’s action, the admission of the motion, and all consequential notices issued by the inquiry committee, contending that the entire process is unconstitutional and contrary to the Judges (Inquiry) Act.