The impeachment process against Justice Yashwant Varma gained momentum on Tuesday after Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla announced a three-member panel to investigate allegations against him. This comes after a large amount of cash was found at his official residence in Delhi earlier this year.

The panel will include Justice Aravind Kumar of the Supreme Court, Justice Maninder Mohan, the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, and senior advocate BV Acharaya.

Accepting the motion signed by 146 MPs seeking Justice Varma’s impeachment, the Speaker said, "The committee will submit its report as early as possible. The proposal will remain pending till the receipt of the report."

What happens next?

The impeachment of a judge is carried out according to Article 124(4) of the Constitution. The committee formed by the Lok Sabha will first investigate the allegations. It has the authority to collect evidence and question witnesses.

Once the inquiry is complete, the panel will submit its report to the Speaker. The Speaker will then present it before the House.

If the judge is found guilty, the House where the process started will vote on a motion to remove him. This will then be repeated in the other House.

For the impeachment to succeed, at least two-thirds of the members present and voting in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha must support it.

Since both the ruling coalition and the opposition agree on removing Justice Varma, the process is likely to go smoothly.

Events leading to this point

The controversy began when stacks of cash, some piles over 1.5 feet high, were discovered at Justice Varma’s official residence in Delhi on March 14. The discovery happened after a fire broke out at the residence while he was away.

Following this, the Supreme Court transferred Justice Varma from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court and withdrew all judicial work from him.

An in-house inquiry committee of the Supreme Court examined 55 witnesses and concluded there was "sufficient substance" in the allegations. The committee also stated that Justice Varma and his family had "active control" over the room where the cash was found and recommended his removal.

Justice Varma challenged the findings in the Supreme Court, claiming the panel acted in a "predetermined manner" and denied him a fair chance to defend himself. However, the court rejected his plea, stating there was no violation of his fundamental rights.

You might also be interested in: India’s U20 women’s football team qualifies for AFC Asian Cup after 20 years