After Resignation, Impeachment of Judge Yashwant Varma Deemed 'Pointless' by Experts
Parliament is set to table an inquiry report on the conduct of former judge Yashwant Varma, who resigned in April amid allegations of possessing unaccounted money. However, constitutional experts have stated that impeachment proceedings against him are now effectively pointless following his resignation.
Justice Varma's resignation was submitted in April this year after reports surfaced suggesting that large sums of unaccounted cash were found at his official residence. The allegations prompted a high-level inquiry, whose report is now scheduled to be placed before Parliament.
But legal scholars point out that under the Constitution, a judge ceases to hold office the moment they resign, and such resignation does not require acceptance by any authority to be effective. Consequently, impeachment—a process for removing a sitting judge—cannot be applied to someone who is no longer a judge.
“The moment a judge resigns, they cease to be a judge. Impeachment is a mechanism to remove a judge from office. If the office is already vacant, the process serves no legal purpose,” explained a constitutional law expert who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The tabling of the inquiry report is therefore seen by many as a political formality, with no substantive legal consequences. Some critics argue that the move allows the government to demonstrate action while avoiding the complexities of a full impeachment trial.
Justice Varma had denied any wrongdoing, and his resignation letter did not admit to any misconduct. However, the controversy has reignited debates about judicial accountability and the procedures for handling allegations against high court and Supreme Court judges.
Under the Constitution, a judge can be removed only through an impeachment motion passed by both Houses of Parliament on grounds of ‘proved misbehaviour or incapacity’. The process is long and rarely used, with only one successful impeachment in India’s history—that of Justice Soumitra Sen in 2011.
Legal experts emphasise that resignation does not preclude other forms of action, such as criminal investigation, but it does render the impeachment route irrelevant. “If there is evidence of a crime, law enforcement agencies can still pursue it independently. But the parliamentary process of removal is moot,” said a former law officer.
The tabling of the report is expected this week, but its practical impact remains limited. Opposition parties have criticised the government’s handling of the matter, alleging that the resignation allowed the judge to escape full parliamentary scrutiny.
