Introduction
Article 124(5) empowers Parliament to make laws regulating the procedure for the presentation of an address and for the investigation and proof of the misbehaviour or incapacity of a Judge of the Supreme Court for the purpose of removal.
It supplements Article 124(4) by providing the legal framework for implementing the constitutional process of judicial removal.
Constitutional Provision
Article 124(5) states:
“Parliament may by law regulate the procedure for the presentation of an address and for the investigation and proof of the misbehaviour or incapacity of a Judge under clause (4).”
Thus, while Article 124(4) lays down the grounds and voting requirements for removal, Article 124(5) authorises Parliament to prescribe the detailed procedure.
Objectives
- Provide a statutory framework for the removal of Supreme Court Judges.
- Ensure a fair, transparent and impartial inquiry.
- Protect judicial independence through due process.
- Balance judicial accountability with constitutional safeguards.
Implementation
Parliament exercised its powers under Article 124(5) by enacting the:
Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968
The Act prescribes:
- Procedure for initiating a removal motion.
- Constitution of a three-member Inquiry Committee.
- Investigation of allegations.
- Opportunity for the Judge to present a defence.
- Submission of the committee’s report.
- Parliamentary procedure after the inquiry.
Removal Procedure (Read with Article 124(4))
- A motion is initiated by:
- 100 Lok Sabha Members, or
- 50 Rajya Sabha Members.
- The Speaker or Chairman decides whether to admit the motion.
- If admitted, a three-member Inquiry Committee is constituted.
- The Committee investigates allegations of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
- If the charges are proved, both Houses of Parliament consider the motion.
- The motion must be passed by each House with the special majority prescribed under Article 124(4).
- The President issues the order removing the Judge.
Significance
Ensures Due Process
Provides a detailed legal procedure before a Judge can be removed.
Protects Judicial Independence
Prevents arbitrary or politically motivated removal.
Promotes Judicial Accountability
Provides a constitutional mechanism for investigating serious misconduct.
Upholds Rule of Law
Ensures that allegations are examined through an independent inquiry before parliamentary action.
Challenges
- The process is lengthy and procedurally complex.
- The requirement of a special majority makes removal difficult.
- No separate statutory mechanism exists for dealing with misconduct that falls short of impeachable behaviour.
- Some proceedings have become infructuous due to the resignation or retirement of judges before completion.
Way Forward
- Strengthen the judicial ethics and in-house accountability framework.
- Establish an independent mechanism to address complaints not warranting impeachment.
- Improve transparency while preserving judicial independence.
- Ensure timely disposal of judicial misconduct complaints.
Conclusion
Article 124(5) empowers Parliament to prescribe the legal procedure for the removal of Supreme Court Judges, thereby operationalising Article 124(4). Through the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, it ensures that judicial removal follows a fair, transparent and constitutionally balanced process, safeguarding both judicial independence and judicial accountability.
