Judicial Transfers & In-House Inquiry

Judicial Transfers & In-House Inquiry

Why in News?

The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court.

• This came after reports of sacks of burnt currency found at his home.
• ⁠The Chief Justice of India (CJI) has also started an in-house inquiry into the matter.

What is a Judicial Transfer?

• Article 222 of the Indian Constitution allows the President to transfer judges from one High Court to another.
• This is done based on the advice of the Chief Justice of India.
• Consent of the judge is not needed.

Judicial Transfer Process in India:

• The Chief Justice of India (CJI) starts the process by proposing the transfer of a judge. His decision carries final authority.
• If a High Court Judge (not a Chief Justice) is being transferred, the CJI consults:
  • The Chief Justice of the judge’s current High Court, and
  • The Chief Justice of the High Court where the judge is to be posted.
  • The CJI may also seek input from one or more Supreme Court judges familiar with the judge’s performance.
• If a Chief Justice of a High Court is being transferred, the matter is considered by the Collegium – the CJI and the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
• Personal Factors Considered: The Collegium also reviews non-legal aspects, such as the judge’s health condition, family needs, location preference.
• Forwarding to the Executive: The Law Minister sends the Collegium’s recommendation to the Prime Minister.
• The Prime Minister advises the President, who formally approves the transfer.
• Once approved, the Department of Justice issues an official transfer order in the Gazette of India.
• The Chief Justices and Chief Ministers of the concerned states are informed about the transfer.

Removal of Judges:

Under Articles 124 and 218 , judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts can be removed by the President on grounds of “proven misbehaviour” or “incapacity”.

What is an In-House Inquiry?

• It is an internal process to check complaints against judges when the issue is not serious enough for impeachment.

When Did It Start?

• After a 1995 Supreme Court case: C. Ravichandran Iyer vs Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee
• The system was formally adopted in 1999

Steps in In-House Inquiry:

1. Complaint is received by the CJI or a Chief Justice.
2. If valid, a three-judge committee is formed (two CJs + one judge).
3. The judge is given a chance to explain.
4. Based on findings:
   1. Minor issue: Judge is warned.
   2. Serious issue: Judge may be asked to resign or retire.
   3. If refused, duties may be taken away or impeachment may be recommended.