On which of the following grounds can a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court be impeached? 1. Violation of the Constitution 2. Proved misbehaviour 3. Incapacity Select the. correct answer using the code given below :

1. Independence of the Indian Judiciary (basic)

To understand why the process of removing a judge is so complex, we must first understand the pillar upon which it rests: the Independence of the Judiciary. In a democracy, the judiciary acts as the protector of the Constitution and the ultimate arbiter of rights. To perform this role without 'fear or favour,' the judiciary must be shielded from the influence of the executive (the government) and the legislature (the Parliament). In India, this independence is considered a part of the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution, meaning even Parliament cannot take it away through amendments Laxmikanth, Basic Structure of the Constitution, p.128.

The Indian judicial system is unique because it is both Integrated and Independent. While 'independent' refers to its freedom from external pressure, 'integrated' refers to its structure. Unlike the USA, where there are separate federal and state courts, India has a single hierarchy of courts Laxmikanth, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.30. This single system ensures that central and state laws are applied uniformly across the country, with the Supreme Court sitting at the apex.

How does the Constitution actually protect this independence? It uses several safeguards:

• Security of Tenure: Judges are not at the 'mercy' of the government; they can only be removed through a very difficult process (which we will explore in the coming hops).
• Appointment Criteria: Appointments are based on legal expertise and professional experience rather than political loyalty or party leanings NCERT Class XI, Judiciary, p.126.
• Separation of Powers: The executive and legislature are restricted from interfering in the judicial decision-making process NCERT Class XI, Judiciary, p.141.

Feature	Integrated Judiciary	Independent Judiciary
Definition	A single, unified hierarchy of courts for the whole country.	Freedom from interference by the Executive or Legislature.
Purpose	Ensures uniformity in the application of laws.	Ensures impartial justice and the Rule of Law.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Basic Structure of the Constitution, p.128; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.30; Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT), JUDICIARY, p.126; Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT), JUDICIARY, p.141

2. Appointment and Qualifications of Judges (basic)

Welcome back! To understand how a judge is removed, we must first understand how they get there in the first place. In India, the President is the formal appointing authority for judges of both the Supreme Court and the High Courts. However, this isn't a discretionary power; it is guided by a specific consultative process known as the Collegium System, which ensures the independence of the judiciary from political interference.

For the Supreme Court (Article 124), a person must be a citizen of India and meet one of three criteria: they must have been a Judge of a High Court for at least 5 years, or an advocate of a High Court for at least 10 years, or be a distinguished jurist in the opinion of the President. In contrast, for a High Court (Article 217), the "distinguished jurist" category does not exist. A candidate must be a citizen and have held a judicial office for 10 years or been an advocate of a High Court for 10 years Indian Polity, High Court, p.354.

The appointment process involves layers of consultation. When appointing High Court judges, the President consults the Chief Justice of India (CJI), the Governor of the state, and the Chief Justice of that specific High Court Indian Polity, High Court, p.354. Over time, through the "Judges Cases," the Supreme Court ruled that the opinion of the CJI is not just consultative but carries "primacy," meaning no appointment can be made unless it conforms with the CJI's view (who, in turn, reflects the collective opinion of the Collegium) Indian Polity, High Court, p.354.

Below is a quick comparison of the qualifications to help you keep them distinct:

Feature	Supreme Court Judge	High Court Judge
Citizenship	Must be a Citizen of India	Must be a Citizen of India
Experience (Judge)	5 years in a High Court	10 years in a Judicial Office
Experience (Advocate)	10 years in a High Court	10 years in a High Court
Distinguished Jurist?	Yes, can be appointed	No, no such provision

Sources: Indian Polity, High Court, p.354; Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE HIGH COURT, p.363; Indian Polity, Supreme Court, p.296

3. Impeachment of the President: 'Violation of the Constitution' (intermediate)

In the Indian constitutional framework, the term 'Impeachment' is technically and exclusively reserved for the President of India. While we often use the word colloquially for judges, the Constitution distinguishes the grounds for the President's removal from those of other high officials. According to Article 56, the President can be removed from office before the expiry of their five-year term only through impeachment for the specific ground of 'Violation of the Constitution' D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, The Union Executive, p.206.

It is fascinating to note that the Constitution does not define what constitutes a 'violation of the Constitution.' This makes it a broad, legal-political ground. In contrast, when we look at the removal of Supreme Court or High Court judges, the grounds are much more specific: 'proved misbehaviour' or 'incapacity'. This distinction is vital for your preparation: 'Violation of the Constitution' is a ground only for the President and cannot be invoked to remove a member of the judiciary M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, High Court, p.355.

The procedure for this impeachment, detailed in Article 61, is described as a quasi-judicial procedure in Parliament. This means that while Parliament is a legislative body, during impeachment, it acts like a court. One House frames the charges, and the other House investigates them. During this investigation, the President has the right to appear and be represented, ensuring a level of natural justice. Despite these provisions, it is a testament to the stability of Indian democracy that no President has been impeached to date M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, President, p.190.

Feature	President of India	Judges (SC/HC)
Primary Ground	Violation of the Constitution	Proved Misbehaviour or Incapacity
Constitutional Article	Article 61	Article 124(4) / Article 217
Nature of Ground	Broad and undefined	Specific and requires investigation report

Sources: Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), The Union Executive, p.206; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), President, p.190; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), High Court, p.355

4. Removal of CAG and Chief Election Commissioner (intermediate)

In our journey through the mechanism of constitutional removals, it is vital to understand that the protection afforded to the Judiciary isn't limited to judges alone. To ensure the independence of other 'watchdog' institutions, the Constitution-makers deliberately linked the removal of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) and the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) to the same rigorous standard as that of a Supreme Court Judge. This is often referred to as providing Security of Tenure, ensuring these officers can perform their duties without fear of executive retaliation Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, p.450.

According to Article 148 (for the CAG) and Article 324 (for the CEC), these individuals can only be removed from office in the "like manner and on the like grounds" as a judge of the Supreme Court. This means the executive cannot dismiss them at will. There are strictly only two grounds for their removal: proved misbehaviour or incapacity Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT Class XI, p.128. It is a common point of confusion, but 'Violation of the Constitution' is a ground reserved solely for the President's impeachment and does not apply here.

The procedure requires a Special Majority in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Specifically, this involves a majority of the total membership of each House AND a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, p.240. However, there is a nuance you must remember regarding the Election Commission: while the CEC is protected by this parliamentary process, the other Election Commissioners can be removed by the President simply on the recommendation of the CEC Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, p.420.

Officer	Removal Ground	Removal Authority / Process
CAG & CEC	Proved misbehaviour or incapacity	Presidential order after Special Majority in Parliament
Other Election Commissioners	Not specified (Executive discretion)	President, on the recommendation of the CEC

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Parliament, p.240; Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT Class XI, Judiciary, p.128; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Elections, p.450; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Election Commission, p.420

5. The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968: The Procedure (exam-level)

While the Constitution provides the grounds for removal, the detailed 'step-by-step' manual is found in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. This Act ensures that the process is rigorous, maintaining judicial independence while allowing for accountability. Interestingly, the procedure is identical for both Supreme Court and High Court judges Indian Polity, High Court, p.355. The process begins with a removal motion, which must be signed by at least 100 members if introduced in the Lok Sabha, or 50 members in the Rajya Sabha. This motion is then submitted to the Speaker or Chairman, who holds the discretionary power to either admit or refuse it.

If the motion is admitted, the Presiding Officer must constitute a three-member committee to investigate the charges of 'proved misbehaviour' or 'incapacity'. This committee is high-powered and consists of:

• The Chief Justice or a Judge of the Supreme Court.
• A Chief Justice of a High Court.
• A distinguished jurist.

If this committee finds the judge guilty, the House can then take up the consideration of the motion. If the committee clears the judge, the process ends right there Indian Polity, High Court, p.355.

Once the charges are upheld by the committee, the motion must be passed by each House of Parliament by a special majority (a majority of the total membership of that House AND a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting) Indian Constitution at Work, JUDICIARY, p.128. Finally, an address is presented to the President, who then issues the formal order for the judge's removal. This multi-layered process ensures that no judge is removed without a general consensus and a thorough judicial inquiry.

Sources: Indian Polity, High Court, p.355; Indian Constitution at Work, JUDICIARY, p.128

6. Specific Grounds: Proved Misbehaviour and Incapacity (exam-level)

In the Indian constitutional scheme, the security of tenure for judges is a cornerstone of judicial independence. To ensure that judges can function without fear or favour, the Constitution of India provides that a judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court can be removed from office only on two specific grounds: Proved Misbehaviour or Incapacity M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Chapter 34, p. 355. This is a deliberate departure from the 'pleasure doctrine' that applies to many other civil servants.

Let’s break down what these terms actually mean, as they are often tested in the UPSC exam:

• Proved Misbehaviour: The term 'misbehaviour' is not exhaustively defined in the Constitution for judges, but legal scholarship and judicial precedents suggest it implies wrong conduct, improper conduct, or a wilful abuse of office. It is not merely a mistake in law or an error of judgment; rather, it usually involves a degree of mens rea (guilty mind) or moral turpitude D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE SUPREME COURT, p. 342. For example, in the 1992 inquiry against Justice V. Ramaswami, the committee found him guilty of "wilful and gross misuse of office" and "reckless disregard of statutory rules" NCERT, Indian Constitution at Work, Chapter 6: JUDICIARY, p. 129.
• Incapacity: This refers to the physical or mental inability of a judge to perform the functions of their office. It ensures that if a judge is no longer capable of discharging their duties due to health or cognitive decline, there is a legal mechanism to vacate the seat.

A critical point of distinction often used as a 'trap' in prelims is the difference between the grounds for removing a Judge versus the President. While the President is impeached for "Violation of the Constitution," this phrase is never used as a ground for the removal of a judge M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Chapter 34, p. 355.

Authority	Grounds for Removal/Impeachment
Supreme Court / High Court Judges	Proved Misbehaviour or Incapacity
President of India	Violation of the Constitution

The word "Proved" is equally important. It signifies that the charges cannot be mere allegations. Under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, a three-member committee (comprising a SC judge, a Chief Justice of a HC, and a distinguished jurist) must investigate the charges and provide a definitive finding of guilt before Parliament can even vote on the removal motion D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE SUPREME COURT, p. 342.

Sources: Indian Polity, Chapter 34: High Court, p.355; Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE SUPREME COURT, p.342; Indian Constitution at Work, Chapter 6: JUDICIARY, p.128-129

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the constitutional safeguards designed to ensure judicial independence, this question tests your ability to distinguish between the specific grounds of removal for different high offices. The building blocks you have studied in Article 124(4) for the Supreme Court and Article 217 for the High Courts establish a very high threshold for removal to protect judges from political pressure. While the term 'impeachment' is technically reserved for the President in the Constitution, the process for judges is similarly rigorous, requiring a special majority in Parliament as detailed in Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT Class XI.

To arrive at the correct answer, you must recall the precise constitutional phraseology. The Constitution explicitly limits the grounds for a judge's removal to just two: 'proved misbehaviour' and 'incapacity'. 'Proved misbehaviour' implies a legal or ethical breach that has been investigated and verified, while 'incapacity' refers to a physical or mental inability to perform judicial functions. As explained in Indian Polity by M. Laxmikanth, these two grounds are the only ones that can trigger an investigation under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. This makes statements 2 and 3 correct, pointing directly to (D) 2 and 3 only.

The common trap here is Statement 1: 'Violation of the Constitution.' UPSC frequently uses this 'distractor' because it sounds authoritative and is indeed a ground for impeachment—but exclusively for the President of India under Article 61. Since the Constitution does not define 'Violation of the Constitution' or 'misbehaviour,' aspirants often confuse the two. By remembering that the 'Violation' ground is unique to the President, you can confidently eliminate any option containing Statement 1, leaving only the correct choice.