In an unprecedented parliamentary development, more than 100 opposition Members of Parliament have reportedly initiated a motion seeking the removal of Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court, alleging misconduct, bias, and deviation from constitutional principles. The move has once again brought national attention to the rarely-invoked constitutional process of judicial impeachment in India.
Under the Constitution of India, judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts enjoy strong safeguards to ensure judicial independence. However, the Constitution also provides a strict and structured mechanism for their removal in exceptional circumstances. Judges can be removed only on two specific grounds :
- proven misbehaviour and/or
- incapacity.
Constitutional Framework for Removal of Judges
The procedure for removal of a Supreme Court judge is laid down under Article 124(4) of the Constitution and further regulated by the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. The same procedure applies to High Court judges by virtue of Article 218.
Step 1: Initiation of Removal Motion
Removal proceedings can be initiated in either House of Parliament. A notice of motion must be supported by:
- At least 100 members of the Lok Sabha, or
- At least 50 members of the Rajya Sabha.
The notice is submitted to the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, who has the discretion to admit or reject it after examining the material placed on record.
In the present case involving Justice G.R. Swaminathan, opposition MPs have crossed the constitutional threshold required to initiate this process, making the development politically and institutionally significant.
Step 2: Constitution of an Inquiry Committee
Once the motion is admitted, an Inquiry Committee is constituted under Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. The committee comprises:
- One judge of the Supreme Court,
- One Chief Justice of a High Court, and
- One distinguished jurist, nominated by the Speaker or Chairman.
If notices are admitted in both Houses, only the notice admitted earlier survives. The committee then conducts a detailed investigation into the allegations.
Step 3: Inquiry Report and Parliamentary Voting
After completing the inquiry, the committee submits its report to the presiding officer of the House. If the judge is found guilty of misbehaviour or incapacity, the removal motion is taken up for voting.
For the motion to succeed, it must be passed in both Houses of Parliament by:
- A majority of the total membership of the House, and
- A two-thirds majority of members present and voting.
This stringent requirement underscores the extraordinary nature of judicial impeachment.
Step 4: Presidential Order
Once both Houses pass the motion with the prescribed majority, it is presented to the President of India, who then issues a formal order removing the judge from office.
Removal of District Judges
Judges of the lower judiciary are not removed through impeachment. A District Judge or Additional District Judge can be removed by the State Government, but only in consultation with the concerned High Court, reflecting the High Court’s supervisory role over subordinate courts.
A Rare Constitutional Moment
Judicial impeachment in India has historically been rare, reflecting the high threshold set by the Constitution. The move against Justice G.R. Swaminathan, therefore, marks a significant moment in constitutional practice, raising important questions about judicial accountability, parliamentary oversight, and the balance between independence of the judiciary and democratic checks.
Whether the motion will proceed beyond initiation remains to be seen, but the development has undeniably revived public discourse on one of the most serious constitutional mechanisms in India’s democratic framework.
