Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

26. Every Judge of the Supreme Court and a High Court on his appointment is irremovable from Office during his tenure except in the manner provided in clauses (4) and (5) of the Article 124 of the Constitution of India. The law made by the Parliament under Article 124(5), namely, the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 (for short "the Act") (and the Judges (Inquiry) Rules, 1969 framed thereunder) is to be read along with Article 124(4) to find out the constitutional scheme for the removal of a Judge. The law so enacted under Article 124(5) provides that any accusation made against a sitting Judge to Initiate the process of his removal from office has to be by not less than the minimum number of members of Parliament specified in the Act, all other methods being excluded. On initiation of the process, the Speaker/Chairman has to decide whether the accusation requires investigation. If he chooses not to act the matter ends there; if the Speaker/Chairman, on a consideration of the materials available and after consulting such persons as he thinks fit, forms the opinion that a prima facie case is made out, he constitutes a Committee in accordance with Section 3(2) of the Act. If the Inquiry Committee at the conclusion of the investigation made by it records a finding that the Judge is "not guilty", the process ends. If the finding made by the Inquiry Committee is that the Judge is 'Guilty', then Parliament considers the motion for removal of the Judge along with the Committee's report and other available materials including the cause, if any, shown by the Judge concerned against his removal for which he has to be given an opportunity after submission of the report to the Speaker/Chairman under Section 4(2) of the Act. To be effective, this opportunity must include supply of a copy of the report to the Judge concerned by the Speaker/Chairman while causing it to be laid before the Parliament under Section 4(3). If the Parliament does not adopt the motion for removal of the Judge, the process ends there. If the motion for removal of the Judge is adopted by the requisite majority by Parliament culminating in the order of removal by the President of India under Article 124(4) of the Constitution, then only the Judge concerned would have the remedy of judicial review available on the permissible grounds against the order of removal.