Congress and some other Opposition parties met on Friday with a proposed impeachment motion against Chief Justice of India (CJI) up for discussion.

Auto refresh feeds

PTI reports that over 60 MPs belonging to seven political parties have signed the notice for impeachment proceedings against CJI. Congress, NCP, CPM, CPI, SP, BSP and Muslim League are among parties that signed the notice.

"We have moved a motion for impeachment of the Chief Justice of India under five listed grounds of misbehaviour. We have sought his removal," Azad said.

"We, on behalf of seven parties which have signed the motion, and also on behalf of the ones who have not signed the motion, met the Rajya Sabha Chairman at his residence at noon," said Ghulam Nabi Azad.

"We were hoping that the anguish of the judges would be addressed by the Chief Justice and that he would set his house in order. More than 3 months have passed, nothing has changed. The Chief Justice has not asserted the independence of the judiciary in the face of pressure by the executive," Sibal added.

"In their letter, the judges stated that administration of the court has not been proper. They said that time and again, they tried to collectively persuade the Chief Justice that certain things are not in order. They lamented that their efforts had failed and all four of them were convinced that unless the institution is preserved, democracy will not survive," said Sibal.

"There are questions about the ways in which he has dealt with certain cases. There have been internal rumblings about these issues," said Kapil Sibal. "Four senior judges publicly expressed their disquiet about the CJI's manner of exercising his powers," he added.

Chief Justice has not asserted the independence of the judiciary: Kapil Sibal

"We only wish to state that anyone occupying the office of Chief Justice of India must be judged on the basis of highest standards of integrity. The first charge relates to the conspiracy to pay illegal gratifications," Sibal said.

"The choice was not easy. The Constitution allows only one recourse. Because there was no other option apart from an impeachment motion, we moved this motion with a heavy heart," said Kapil Sibal.

"There are various taped conversations with the CBI in which a retired Orissa High Court judge is talking about some deals with other people. This conversation also mentions the CJI...this ia a very serious issue," said Kapil Sibal.

"These rumours are absolutely false. Remember, this is a very serious issue. We intentionally did not involve Dr Manmohan Singh because he has been the prime minister," said Kapil Sibal.

Here is the statement issued by the seven Opposition parties on the impeachment motion against CJI:

Seven Opposition parties have come together to set in motion the House proceedings to impeach the Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra. Seventy one MPs from seven political parties had signed the impeachment motion but as seven have retired, the number is now 64. The impeachment motion needs to be supported by at least 50 Members of Parliaments.

"I am not party to or privy with discussions that have taken place between different parties and for me to reflect specifically on whether the grounds are justified would be unfair," Khurshid told reporters. His statement was being seen as a tacit way of underlining the seriousness of the matter to his own party colleagues, as he chose to stay away from the impeachment notice initiated by Congress and supported by 6 other political parties.

"To use the power as intimidatory tactics when neither you have a case of “proven misconduct” or the numbers on your side, is a serious threat to judicial independence. My preliminary reaction to the impeachment motion filed today is clear. It is a revenge petition after the falsehood of the Congress Party has been established in the Justice Loya death case," Jaitley wrote.

Finance Minister and senior lawyer, Arun Jaitley expressed his views on the judge Loya death case verdict by the Supreme Court and the Opposition's move to impeach the sitting CJI in the form of an article on Facebook. The finance minister opined that the Congress party is using the "impeachment as a political tool" and he called it a 'revenge petition.'

Reacting to the impeachment motion proceedings initiated by seven Opposition parties, the Supreme court has expressed its concern on the issue. The apex court has reportedly sought assistance from Attorney General KK Venugopal asking his opinion on whether media should be stopped from discussing the impeachment motion.

"It all comes down to a majoritarian government,” Nariman said, adding, “when you have a majoritarian government, these things happen. When you don’t have a majoritarian government, then people are more careful," he said.

Justice Fali Nariman, speaking to The Indian Express , conceded that the fact that other senior judges felt that CJI was not being fair in allocation of cases was a very grave problem. However, he said that the spritit of collegiality should be preserved. He also said that the government will "not be that foolish" to not appoint Justice Ranjan Gogoi as CJI, who is next in line, in terms of seniority.

Judiciary in disorder: It all comes down to a majoritarian govt, says Justice Fali Nariman

What are the 5 Reasons cited by Opposition to move impeachment motion

They said if the Upper House chairman did not find merit in the notice for the impeachment, the decision could call for a judicial review. "The chairman's decision is open to being challenged. It is bound to go for a judicial review," said a Congress leader.

As the Congress awaits the decision of Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu on an impeachment notice moved by it and other parties against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, it is considering moving the Supreme Court if the petition is rejected, party leaders said.

"It is only a convention, though there is no legal or constitutional bar (on this)," the leader said.

The Congress was also trying to build up "moral pressure" on the Chief Justice of India in the hope that he would step aside from judicial duty if an impeachment motion was moved against him. Judges who faced impeachment had earlier stepped aside from judicial work and the Chief Justice should do the same, a party leader said.

Congress attempts on building up moral pressure on CJI to step aside from judicial duties

According to the provisions in the handbook for Rajya Sabha members, no advance publicity should be given to any notice to be taken up in the House till it is admitted by the chairman. "A notice for raising a matter in the House should not be given publicity by any member or other person until it has been admitted by the Chairman and circulated by members. A member should not raise the issue of a notice given by him and pending consideration of the Chairman," according to Rule 2.2 of Parliamentary Customs and Conventions in the handbook.

An official in Parliament stressed that making public the contents of a notice before it was admitted violated Parliamentary rules. This assumes significance in the wake of the seven opposition parties, led by the Congress, initiating an unprecedented step last week for the impeachment of CJI Misra by moving a notice levelling several charges against him.

Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu on Monday rejected the Congress-led notice to impeach the Chief Justice of India, Dipak Misra.

According to sources, Naidu wanted to clear the mess before the Supreme Court reconvened on Monday so that Chief Justice Dipak Misra faced no embarassment, reported News18.

Vice-President wants to clear the mess before SC convenes, says sources

This is the first time ever that an impeachment notice has been filed against a sitting CJI

2) No proof to back five allegations were true: Reports said that another reason the motion was rejected is that there was no proof available to back the five allegations levelled against CJI Dipak Misra.

1) Violation of Rajya Sabha guidelines by Opposition parties: While reviewing the notice, the Rajya Sabha officials had mentioned that making public the contents of a notice before it is admitted by the chair is in violation of parliamentary rules. According to the provisions in the handbook for Rajya Sabha members, no advance publicity should be given to any notice to be taken up in the House till it is admitted by the chairman.

"The chairman's decision is open to being challenged. It is bound to go for a judicial review," the report quoted a Congress leader as saying.

The Congress party earlier had said that it would consider moving the Supreme Court if the notice of CJI impeachment was rejected, PTI had reported. Party leaders had said that if the Rajya Sabha chairman did not find merit in the notice, the decision would call for a judicial review.

Tweeting shortly after Vice-President Venkaiah Naidu rejected the Congress-led Opposition, party leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi said: "Expectedly, Sh Naidu rejected imp’ment motion. Unexpectedly, he did so within one day of returning from outstn. Hopefully, the alacrity was not intended to render infructuous calls for CJI to stop Admn work."

As per a copy of the order rejecting Opposition's CJI impeachment notice, Rajya Sabha chairman Venkaiah Naidu said that the allegations "seriously" undermine the judiciary's independence. "Charges made on suspicion and assumption. Allegations seriously undermine the independence of the judiciary. None of the five allegations in the notice were tenable or admissable," he reportedly said.

"RS Chairman can’t decide on merits in absence of quasi judicial or administrative power (M.Krishna Swami’s case). If all charges were to be proved before inquiry as RS Chairman suggests, Constitution & Judges (Inquiry) Act will have no relevance. Don’t muzzle Constitution," Surjewala said.

He also said Naidu's decision exposed Leader of Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley's "naked prejudice" by calling it a revenge petition. "Within hours of 64 MP’s submitting the impeachment motion, Leader of Rajya Sabha(FM) had expressed naked prejudice by calling it a ‘revenge petition’ virtually dictating the verdict to Rajya Sabha Chairman on that day. Has ‘Revenge Petition’ now become ‘Rescue Order’?" he tweeted.

Congress spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala said Venkaiah Naidu can't adjudge the motion as he as no merits to decide on the merits of the motion. "RS Chairman can’t adjudge the motion, for he has no mandate to decide the merits of the motion," he tweeted, adding, "This is truly a fight between forces ‘Rejecting Democracy’ & voices ‘Rescuing Democracy’."

"It is within the powers of Rajya Sabha chairman Venkaiah Naidu to reject the order. This was politically motivated and they (Congress) wanted to malign the judiciary," Additional Solicitor General of India Satya Pal Singh told CNN-News18.​

Speaking at the 'Save the Constituition' campaign in Delhi, Congress chief Rahul Gandhi said: "The Supreme Court is being muzzled and crushed. People have lost faith in the judiciary." Follow the LIVE updates on Rahul Gandhi's speech here.

'Supreme Court is being muzzled, and crushed': Rahul Gandhi at 'Save The Constitution' rally

"When you have a man like the chief justice of the Supreme Court, it (impeachment notice) has to have something that is far more important than just saying he did not do this or that. The vice president has the statutory authority and he has rightly rejected the notice," Nariman told a TV channel. He said this move by the Opposition led by the Congress was only to demean the institution of the Supreme Court and it was not about Justice Misra. - PTI

Eminent jurist Fali S Nariman Monday said the issues raised in the impeachment notice against CJI Dipak Misra were not of "sufficient gravity and rightly rejected" by Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu. Nariman said Naidu, the chairman of the Rajya Sabha, was the only statutory authority to take the decision on the notice.

CPM general secretary Sitaram Yechury expressed his disappointment and said Venkaiah Naidu's move to reject the CJI impeachment notice was a wrong one. "This was a wrong move by chairman of Rajya Sabha. This motion was not given proper attention. Something else is behind this. Independence of judiciary is in danger," he said.

"Within hours of 64 MP’s submitting the impeachment motion, Leader of Rajya Sabha (FM) had expressed naked prejudice by calling it a ‘revenge petition’ virtually dictating the verdict to Rajya Sabha Chairman on that day. Has ‘Revenge Petition’ now become ‘Rescue Order’?,” Randeep Surjewala said.

The Congress party will move Supreme Court for a judicial review of the Rajya Sabha Chairman’s order rejecting the impeachment motion against CJI Dipak Misra. Meanwhile, the party questioned how could the vice president decide such a matter within hours.

Lashing out at Congress president Rahul Gandhi after his 'save Constitution protests', BJP's Sambit Patra said that the Congress party does not trust army, Supreme Court, Election Committee, EVMs, or even RBI.

Reacting to Naidu's order rejecting the impeachment notice against the CJI moved by 64 MPs, the former Attorney General of India said that the RS chairman has "applied his mind" after consulting legal experts on the issue.

Eminent jurist Soli Sorabjee today said the Congress-led opposition had no chance to succeed in the Supreme Court against Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu's decision rejecting impeachment notice against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.

Congress leader and eminent lawyer Kapil Sibal addressed a press conference to respond to theobjections raised by Venkaiah Naidu in his order rejecting the impeachment motion against the Chief Justice of India.

Sibal, in a press conference, said that it is their "privilege to move the motion" and the vice president in his capacity as chairman of Rajya Sabha cannot boot this privilege.

Kapil Sibal, in his press conference, said that the law lays down the procedure in case the motion to impeach a Supreme Court judge. The Chairman of the Rajya Sabha must consult an emminent jurist, a judge of the high court and the Chief Justice of India. In this case, the judges of the collegium must have been consulted as the CJI himslef was under scrutiny. Hence, the decision to rehect the motion is illegal, Sibal said.

Kapil Sibal said that Venkaiah Naidu decided the matter within hours of returning to India after a foreign visit. He said that such momentous issues must be given their due diligence and attention. It is a hasty decision as by this, the government appears to be in a tearing hurry to block the attempts at an enquiry.

Sibal said that the onus of proving the charges was not on the MPs, it was on the judicial committee formed after the motion was admitted.

Congress further argued that the Rajya Sabha Chairman's order rejecting the motion of impeachment was unprecedented. He said that presenting a motion was the MP's privilege. He said that Naidu wrote in his order that the Opposition's charges are not proven, however, by rejecting the notice they ensured that an enquiry does not happen.

Venkaiah Naidu's decision unprecedented as no Speaker has rejected such momentous motion at preliminary stage

Congress leader Kapil Sibal said that the Congress party will ensure that there is no involvement of Chief Justice of India in the hearing, or listing, of their review petition.

Will ensure CJI Dipak Misra has nothing to do with review petition against Venkaiah Naidu's order

BJP spokesperson Meenakshi Lekhi held a counter press conference to rebut Kapil Sibal's charges. She said that the language of the notice signed by Opposition MPs in itself suggests that the MPs were themselves not sure of their charges.

However, the Opposition seems to be relying on words like prima facie, apparently etc. There are not enough documentary or even circumstantial evidence to support their claims.

Lekhi said that in Hindi the impeachment is called Mahabhiyog prastav, which literally means that the abhiyog (charges or allegations) in this case must have a much more stronger grounding than in other cases.

Congress leader, senior advocate Kapil Sibal has said that he will not appear in the court of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra till the latter retires. “I will not appear in the Chief Justice's court from tomorrow onwards... till he retires, because that is consistent with the highest standards of my profession,” said Sibal.

"This instance has set a bad precedence, which is not good for democracy," he told PTI here, adding that Naidu should have followed proper procedures before rejecting the notice.

Former Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee said today Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu acted in a "hurried manner" while rejecting the impeachment notice against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.

Senior advocate and Congress Rajya Sabha lawmaker Kapil Sibal, who is at the forefront and spearheading the campaign to impeach the present CJI, however, had put up a spirited defence in favour of Justice Ramaswami in Lok Sabha.

It is interesting to note that all the previous three impeachment motions have been moved when Congress was in power at the Centre. The higher judiciary was in for the shock in 1993 for the first time in independent India when impeachment proceedings were initiated in Parliament against Supreme Court judge V Ramaswami on charges of corruption following the report of the inquiry commission.

The Congress, which spearheaded an unprecedented move to impeach the Chief Justice of India on Friday, had in fact opposed such proceedings initiated 25 years ago when it was in power.

​ Senior Congress leader and former law minister Salman Khurshid said today he was not kept in the loop on the impeachment notice against CJI Dipak Misra, and refrained from commenting on Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu's decision to reject it.

"Concerned parties will have to examine the grounds on which the motion has been rejected by the Vice President. We will have to consult among us, especially who moved the motion," Raja said.

CPI leader D Raja, part of the opposition led by Congress which moved the impeachment motion against the Chief Justice of India, today said the concerned parties would have to examine the grounds on which the notice has been rejected by Rajya Sabha Chairman Venkaiah Naidu.

On why DMK MPs did not sign the notice, she said that her party does not believe in bringing the judiciary under question. “We hope that there will be discussion and further dialogues between the judges so that they can come to a compromise. This is the last resort for every citizen. That's why party decided not to sign it,” she added.

DMK MP Kanimozhi has said that the government rejecting the impeachment notice was expected. “What do you expect the government to do? They do not encourage anybody who tries to question them,” she said.

Monday's proceedings started 13 to 14 minutes late instead of the normal 10.30 a.m. The electronic display board showed that none of the court had assembled, giving rise to speculation in the Chief Justice's court which was packed to capacity.

Well before Monday's proceedings commenced, news had already reached the Supreme Court that Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu had rejected the move by 64 Rajya Sabha members seeking the impeachment of the Chief Justice.

Unruffled by the move seeking his removal by 64 MPs, Chief Justice Dipak Misra on Monday presided over Supreme Court number 1 - although there were some anxious moments initially. Chief Justice Misra dealt with the cases in his usual ease.

Congress leader, senior advocate Kapil Sibal has said that he will not appear in the court of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra till the latter retires. “I will not appear in the Chief Justice's court from tomorrow onwards... till he retires, because that is consistent with the highest standards of my profession,” said Sibal.

"This instance has set a bad precedence, which is not good for democracy," he told PTI here, adding that Naidu should have followed proper procedures before rejecting the notice.

Former Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee said today Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu acted in a "hurried manner" while rejecting the impeachment notice against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.

Mr Kapil Sibal would like us to believe that Venkaiah Naidu is obligated by law to admit the motion & necessarily constitute an inquiry committee of 3 members- This stage is not direct- It is subject to Chairman RS admitting the motion after due consultation 3/n pic.twitter.com/56J5cz3chL

So in the clip you saw Kapil Sibal says no judge can be guilty merely because 50 MPs sign a motion! How does that standard change today I beg to ask?? The charges against CJI Misra date back to days before he was a SC judge! Did UPA make him a judge despite those?? JaiHind 6/6 pic.twitter.com/zXtaTFETFc

Senior advocate and Congress Rajya Sabha lawmaker Kapil Sibal, who is at the forefront and spearheading the campaign to impeach the present CJI, however, had put up a spirited defence in favour of Justice Ramaswami in Lok Sabha.

It is interesting to note that all the previous three impeachment motions have been moved when Congress was in power at the Centre. The higher judiciary was in for the shock in 1993 for the first time in independent India when impeachment proceedings were initiated in Parliament against Supreme Court judge V Ramaswami on charges of corruption following the report of the inquiry commission.

The Congress, which spearheaded an unprecedented move to impeach the Chief Justice of India on Friday, had in fact opposed such proceedings initiated 25 years ago when it was in power.

​ Senior Congress leader and former law minister Salman Khurshid said today he was not kept in the loop on the impeachment notice against CJI Dipak Misra, and refrained from commenting on Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu's decision to reject it.

"Concerned parties will have to examine the grounds on which the motion has been rejected by the Vice President. We will have to consult among us, especially who moved the motion," Raja said.

CPI leader D Raja, part of the opposition led by Congress which moved the impeachment motion against the Chief Justice of India, today said the concerned parties would have to examine the grounds on which the notice has been rejected by Rajya Sabha Chairman Venkaiah Naidu.

On why DMK MPs did not sign the notice, she said that her party does not believe in bringing the judiciary under question. “We hope that there will be discussion and further dialogues between the judges so that they can come to a compromise. This is the last resort for every citizen. That's why party decided not to sign it,” she added.

DMK MP Kanimozhi has said that the government rejecting the impeachment notice was expected. “What do you expect the government to do? They do not encourage anybody who tries to question them,” she said.

Monday's proceedings started 13 to 14 minutes late instead of the normal 10.30 a.m. The electronic display board showed that none of the court had assembled, giving rise to speculation in the Chief Justice's court which was packed to capacity.

Well before Monday's proceedings commenced, news had already reached the Supreme Court that Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu had rejected the move by 64 Rajya Sabha members seeking the impeachment of the Chief Justice.

Unruffled by the move seeking his removal by 64 MPs, Chief Justice Dipak Misra on Monday presided over Supreme Court number 1 - although there were some anxious moments initially. Chief Justice Misra dealt with the cases in his usual ease.

Latest updates: Finance Minister and senior advocate Arun Jaitley slammed the Congress party for moving the impeachment motion. Terming it a 'political tool' and 'intimidatory tactic', Jaitley said that this was Congress' 'revenge petition after the Supreme Court judgement on judge Loya case exposed the 'falsehood' being spread by the party.

The Congress itself seems to be divided on the issue of the impeachment motion against the CJI. Salman Khurshid said that he was not a part of the impeachment motion notice because he said that the procedure of the judiciary needs to be respected.

Kapil Sibal said that the Opposition parties did not have any option apart from filing an impeachment notice. He said that the Chief Justice had not asserted the independence of the judiciary.

Ghulam Nabi Azad, in a press conference, said that Opposition parties had moved impeachment motion under five grounds of misbehaviour.

Over 60 MPs belonging to seven political parties have signed the notice for impeachment proceedings against CJI.

According to CNN-News18, five Opposition leaders had turned for the meeting against the Chief Justice of India. They are expected to address a press conference at 1 pm.

Congress and some other Opposition parties met on Friday with a proposed impeachment motion against Chief Justice of India (CJI) up for discussion.

Senior Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad had called the meeting which comes days after the party had said that option of moving an impeachment motion against Chief Justice Dipak Misra was still open.

Congress leaders had said that the issues raised by four Supreme Court judges have not been addressed yet by the CJI.

They had said the party was concerned about the independence of judiciary and people must protect the institution from "gross interferences by the government."

During the Budget Session that concluded earlier in April, the Congress had initiated a move collecting more than 50 signatures of the Rajya Sabha members in a bid to table the motion, but there were reservations from parties like the Trinamool Congress.

The Congress kept the move on hold, saying it wanted to get as much support as possible from other parties.

With inputs from agencies