The removal of lower court judges in India is governed by the “Removal of Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. To remove a lower court judge in India, a comprehensive and lengthy procedure is followed, which includes:
Initiation of Inquiry: The process usually begins with a motion in either house of Parliament or the State Legislature, recommending an inquiry into the judge’s conduct. This motion must be supported by a specific number of members.
Investigation Committee: If the motion is approved, an investigation committee is formed to inquire into the allegations against the judge. This committee usually consists of a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, a Chief Justice of a High Court, and a distinguished jurist.
Recommendation: Based on the committee’s findings, if it is determined that the judge is guilty of misconduct, the committee will recommend the judge’s removal.
Parliamentary Process: The recommendation is then presented before the Parliament (in the case of High Court judges) or the State Legislature (in the case of lower court judges), where it undergoes a detailed debate and vote. A special majority is often required for removal.
Presidential Approval: If the Parliament or State Legislature approves the removal, it is sent to the President of India for formal approval.
President’s Decision: The President, based on the recommendation of the Parliament or State Legislature, may remove the judge from office.
It’s important to note that the process for removal of judges is rigorous and is designed to ensure the independence of the judiciary while holding judges accountable for any misconduct. Specific cases of removal would depend on individual circumstances and allegations.
There have been several important cases related to the removal of lower court judges in various countries. Here are a few notable examples:
The Judges Inquiry Act, 1968: This act provides the procedure for the removal of judges, including lower court judges, in India. It lays down the process for conducting inquiries into allegations of misbehavior or incapacity.
K. Veeraswami v. Union of India (1991): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Governor’s sanction is necessary for the initiation of criminal proceedings against a judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This case clarified the protection given to judges from frivolous or politically motivated prosecutions.
Rameshwar Prasad Goyal v. State of Rajasthan (2017): This case dealt with the removal of a lower court judge. The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of following due process and observing principles of natural justice when initiating proceedings for the removal of a judge.
State of Rajasthan v. Prakash Chand (1998): In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for a fair and impartial inquiry when allegations of misconduct are made against a lower court judge. It underlined that the inquiry should be conducted by a competent authority.
In Re Anastaplo (1961, United States): This case involved the denial of admission to the Illinois Bar for a law school graduate who refused to answer questions about his political beliefs during a character and fitness review. It raised questions about the removal of judges and officials based on their political or ideological views.
Justice Soumitra Sen (2011, India): Justice Soumitra Sen was the first judge in India’s history to be impeached by the Parliament. He was found guilty of financial misconduct, including misappropriation of funds, which led to his removal from the lower court.
Perjury Charges Against Judge Kent (2009, United States): Samuel B. Kent, a federal district court judge in Texas, faced perjury charges and was subsequently impeached and removed from office. This case highlighted issues related to the removal of judges for criminal misconduct.
Justice Blount (1829, United States): West H. Humphreys, a federal district judge in Alabama, was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives but resigned before the Senate could try him. This case underscores the historical importance of impeachment as a means of removing judges.
Justice Roy Moore (2003 and 2016, United States): Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, was removed from office twice- once for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state courthouse and later for refusing to abide by the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage.
These cases illustrate the diverse range of issues that can lead to the removal of lower court judges, including ethical misconduct, criminal behavior, and political or ideological conflicts. Keep in mind that the specifics of such cases can vary widely depending on the legal and political systems of each country.