Context:
A notice for removal of Justice G.R. Swaminathan (Madras High Court) was submitted in December 2025 by 107 MPs. The episode has revived scrutiny of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, particularly the power of the Speaker/Chairman to refuse admission of a removal motion.
Key Highlights:
- Recent Development
- On December 9, 2025, 107 MPs submitted a notice for removal.
- Allegations included violation of secular principles and judicial impropriety.
- The notice was addressed to the Lok Sabha Speaker.
- Constitutional Framework
- Removal provisions under:
- Article 124(4) – Supreme Court Judges
- Article 124(5) – Parliament empowered to regulate procedure
- Article 217(1)(b) – High Court Judges
- Article 218 – Application of SC removal procedure to HC judges
- Grounds for removal:
- Proved misbehaviour
- Incapacity
- Statutory Mechanism
- Governed by the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
- Requires:
- Minimum 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs to initiate motion.
- Constitution of a three-member inquiry committee (judicial + jurist members).
- Motion passed by special majority in both Houses.
- Identified Loophole
- The Speaker/Chairman can refuse to admit the motion, even if required signatures are met.
- Constitution does not explicitly grant power to reject the motion under Article 124(5).
- Raises concerns about executive influence and politicisation.
- Potential tension between judicial independence and parliamentary discretion.
- Broader Issues
- Judicial accountability vs judicial independence debate.
- Extremely high removal threshold has resulted in no successful impeachment to date.
- Risk of reputational damage without procedural closure.
Relevant Prelims Points:
- Removal requires special majority:
- Majority of total membership of House +
- Two-thirds of members present and voting.
- Term used in Constitution: “Removal”, not impeachment (commonly used term).
- Judges hold office till:
- 65 years (SC)
- 62 years (HC)
- Inquiry committee composition under Judges (Inquiry) Act.
- Difference between removal of:
- President (Impeachment under Article 61)
- Judges (Removal under Article 124/217).
Relevant Mains Points:
GS 2 – Polity & Governance
- Balancing judicial independence and accountability.
- Debate on reforming the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
- Risks of political misuse or shielding through procedural discretion.
- Strengthening transparency without undermining separation of powers.
Constitutional Principles Involved
- Separation of Powers
- Checks and Balances
- Constitutional Morality
- Rule of Law
- Way Forward
- Clarify through legislation or judicial interpretation the limits of Speaker’s discretion.
- Establish a more transparent preliminary scrutiny mechanism.
- Consider independent judicial oversight in admission stage.
- Strengthen ethical frameworks within judiciary to prevent politicisation.
UPSC Relevance:
Crucial for GS 2 (Judiciary, Constitutional Mechanisms, Accountability) and Prelims (Articles related to removal of judges). The issue directly relates to debates on institutional integrity and constitutional safeguards.