← 14 September 2026's Current Affairs · Polity GS-2 Prelims ★★★☆☆ Mains ★★★★★
Renewed scrutiny of in-house procedure for judicial misconduct
बातमीत का?
Article 124(4): the judge-removal route UPSC has asked about four times
Allegations against a High Court judge have drawn attention to the constitutional removal process and the judiciary's in-house inquiry procedure.
Why it matters: GS-2 core
What you need to know
2 मिनिटे
Allegations against a sitting High Court judge have renewed attention on how the judiciary handles complaints of misconduct against its own members.
A sitting High Court or Supreme Court judge can be removed from office only through a motion passed by a special majority in both Houses of Parliament under Article 124(4), read with Article 218 of the Constitution.
Short of removal, the Supreme Court's "in-house procedure" allows a committee of judges to inquire into complaints and recommend steps such as asking the judge concerned to resign.
स्रोत: Topper IAS editorial (PIB / The Hindu / Indian Express)
महत्त्वाची तथ्ये
Remember these
- A sitting High Court/Supreme Court judge can be removed only via a motion passed by special majority in both Houses of Parliament.
- The removal process rests on Article 124(4), read with Article 218 of the Constitution.
- The Supreme Court's in-house procedure lets a committee of judges inquire into misconduct complaints.
- The in-house committee can only recommend steps like asking the judge to resign; it cannot itself remove a judge.
- Recent allegations against a sitting High Court judge have renewed attention on this process.
पूर्व · मुख्य
How the exam will ask it
पूर्व
- A sitting High Court judge can be removed from office only through a motion passed by a special majority in both Houses of Parliament.
- The Supreme Court's in-house procedure allows a committee of judges to recommend that a judge resign, but such a recommendation cannot by itself remove the judge from office.
मुख्य
GS Paper 2 - Polity/Judiciary: allegations of misconduct against sitting judges expose the gap between the constitutional removal process under Article 124(4)/218 and the non-statutory in-house procedure, which can only recommend resignation. This raises implications for judicial accountability and independence, and points to the way forward through calls for a statutory, transparent mechanism such as a Judicial Standards and Accountability framework.
Quick recall
Answer before you reveal
With reference to judicial accountability in India, consider the following statements:
- A sitting High Court judge can be removed from office only through a motion passed by a special majority in both Houses of Parliament.
- The Supreme Court's in-house procedure allows a committee of judges to recommend that a judge resign, but such a recommendation cannot by itself remove the judge from office.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- 1 only
- 2 only
- Both 1 and 2
- Neither 1 nor 2
उत्तर पहा
उत्तर: C — Removal of a High Court judge requires a special-majority motion in Parliament under Article 124(4)/Article 218; short of that, the in-house procedure can only recommend resignation, not remove a judge.
Convert this topic into marks
Today's 10-MCQ test · instant analysis · Powered by AdaptIQ