ASG Raja Thakare Appointed to Assist Lok Sabha Inquiry Committee in Justice Yashwant Varma Impeachment Proceedings

Introduction

In a significant development in the ongoing impeachment proceedings against Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court, the Central Government has appointed Additional Solicitor General of India (ASG) Raja Thakare to assist the three-member Inquiry Committee constituted by the Lok Sabha. The Committee has been formed under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, marking a crucial constitutional step in examining allegations that could lead to the removal of a sitting High Court judge.

This appointment underscores the seriousness of the allegations and reflects the constitutional and procedural safeguards embedded in India’s judicial accountability framework.

Appointment of ASG Raja Thakare: Legal and Constitutional Context

The Ministry of Law and Justice, through a formal notification issued on January 16, 2026, confirmed the engagement of ASG Raja Thakare to assist the Inquiry Committee. As an Additional Solicitor General, Raja Thakare represents one of the highest law officers of the Union of India, entrusted with assisting constitutional authorities in complex legal matters of national importance.

His role will involve:

• Assisting the Inquiry Committee in evaluating evidence,
• Advising on procedural compliance under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968,
• Ensuring that the inquiry adheres to principles of natural justice and constitutional propriety.

The appointment reflects the gravity of impeachment proceedings, which remain one of the most serious mechanisms available under the Indian Constitution to ensure judicial integrity.

Composition of the Inquiry Committee

The three-member Inquiry Committee has been constituted strictly in accordance with Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. It includes:

1. Justice Arvind Kumar, Judge, Supreme Court of India
2. Justice M. M. Shrivastava, Chief Justice, Madras High Court
3. Vasudeva Acharya, Senior Advocate, Karnataka High Court

This composition ensures a balance of judicial experience from both constitutional courts and the Bar, thereby lending credibility, expertise, and impartiality to the inquiry process.

Allegations Against Justice Yashwant Varma

Justice Yashwant Varma came under scrutiny following a controversial incident in which unaccounted cash was reportedly discovered at his official residence. The discovery occurred accidentally during a fire incident, triggering widespread concern over judicial propriety and accountability.

Following the incident:

• The then Chief Justice of India (CJI) initiated an in-house inquiry procedure, a mechanism evolved by the judiciary to deal with allegations of misconduct against judges.
• The in-house committee reportedly found prima facie substance in the allegations.
• Based on the findings, Justice Varma was advised to resign or opt for voluntary retirement, in keeping with established judicial conventions.

However, Justice Varma declined both options, thereby setting the stage for formal impeachment proceedings.

Initiation of Impeachment Proceedings in Parliament

Subsequent to Justice Varma’s refusal to step down, motions for impeachment were introduced in both Houses of Parliament. Under Articles 124(4) and 217(1)(b) of the Constitution of India, a judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court may be removed only on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity, following a rigorous parliamentary and judicial process.

The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 operationalises this constitutional mandate by providing for:

• Constitution of an inquiry committee,
• Investigation into allegations,
• Submission of a report to Parliament.

The present inquiry thus represents a rare but constitutionally significant exercise of parliamentary oversight over the judiciary.

Justice Varma’s Challenges Before the Supreme Court

Justice Varma approached the Supreme Court of India on multiple occasions, challenging various stages of the process.

Challenge to In-House Procedure

In his first petition, Justice Varma contested:

• The validity of the in-house inquiry procedure, and
• The CJI’s recommendation for impeachment.

He argued that the process prejudiced his rights and compromised fairness.

However, the Supreme Court refused to interfere, noting that:

• Justice Varma had participated in the in-house proceedings,
• The challenge was raised only after the outcome went against him,
• Such a challenge amounted to an afterthought rather than a bona fide grievance.

Challenge to the Constitution of the Inquiry Committee

Justice Varma later challenged the constitution of the three-member Inquiry Committee by the Lok Sabha Speaker. His principal argument was based on an interpretation of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

Argument Raised

Justice Varma contended that:

• When impeachment motions are introduced in both Houses of Parliament,
• The Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha must jointly constitute the Inquiry Committee.

Since the Committee was constituted by the Lok Sabha Speaker alone, Justice Varma argued that the process was legally flawed.

Supreme Court’s Rejection

A bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma rejected this argument. The Court observed that:

• Although motions were introduced in both Houses,
• Only the Lok Sabha Speaker admitted the motion,
• The Rajya Sabha had not admitted the motion at that stage.

The Court clarified that:

• The provisions of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 cannot be interpreted in a manner that renders an admitted motion in one House otiose or ineffective.
• Procedural technicalities cannot override the substantive constitutional objective of accountability.

This ruling reaffirmed the principle that statutory interpretation must advance, rather than defeat, constitutional processes.

Significance of ASG Raja Thakare’s Appointment

The appointment of ASG Raja Thakare carries substantial legal and institutional significance:

1. Strengthening Procedural Integrity
   His involvement ensures strict adherence to statutory requirements under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
2. Enhancing Credibility of the Inquiry
   As a senior law officer of the Union, his assistance reinforces public confidence in the impartiality of the process.
3. Balancing Judicial Independence and Accountability
   The case exemplifies the delicate balance between protecting judicial independence and enforcing accountability through constitutional mechanisms.

Conclusion

The appointment of ASG Raja Thakare to assist the Lok Sabha Inquiry Committee marks an important milestone in the impeachment proceedings against Justice Yashwant Varma. It reflects the constitutional seriousness with which allegations against members of the higher judiciary are treated, while also demonstrating the layered safeguards built into India’s legal system.

As the inquiry progresses, it will not only determine the fate of Justice Varma but will also contribute to evolving jurisprudence on judicial accountability, parliamentary oversight, and the interpretation of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. The outcome of this process is likely to have lasting implications for the constitutional relationship between the judiciary and the legislature in India.

Also Read

Supreme Court Issues Landmark Directions on Student Suicides and Scholarship Delays in Higher Educational Institutions

5th NUJS International Client Counselling Competition 2026 at NUJS Kolkata, Register by 25 Jan!