What's New :
CSE QUALIFIER 2026: Complete Prelims & Mains Readiness through Daily Tests & Mentorship
31st July 2025 (13 Topics)

1985 Act Backs CJI Inquiry

Context:

The Supreme Court has upheld the Chief Justice of India’s (CJI) authority under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 to initiate an in-house inquiry into allegations of judicial misconduct.

Legal Basis:

  • The Supreme Court invoked the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985, asserting that it empowers the top court to preserve “institutional integrity” by initiating an in-house inquiry in cases of judicial impropriety.
  • The in-house procedure is not statutory but is recognized as a constitutionally permissible mechanism for judicial accountability.

Supreme Court’s Position:

  • The bench clarified that the CJI’s administrative authority permits initiating a non-statutory in-house inquiry without violating judicial independence.
  • The inquiry is intended for fact-finding and does not result in automatic removal; removal can only be initiated through impeachment under Article 124(4) or 217 read with Article 124.

Constitutional and Institutional Relevance:

  • The case reaffirms the delicate balance between judicial independence and accountability.
  • Reinforces that internal mechanisms for oversight are consistent with constitutional principles, provided they do not lead directly to punitive outcomes.

Judges (Protection) Act, 1985:

  •   Purpose: Shields judges from civil/criminal liability for acts done in judicial capacity.
  •   Scope: Protects judicial independence; does not prevent disciplinary action through other laws.
  •   Nature: Enabling statute, not a mechanism for inquiry/removal.

Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968:

  •   Purpose: Provides procedure for removal of SC/HC judges.
  •   Key Process:
    •   Motion in Parliament ? Inquiry Committee formation.
    •   Report submitted ? If guilty, removal motion debated/voted in Parliament.
  •   Transparency: Committee reports under this Act are public, unlike in-house inquiries.
In-House Mechanism:
  •   Administrative process by CJI (not backed by statute).
  •   Cannot directly remove a judge; recommends action or resignation.

Verifying, please be patient.

Enquire Now