The draft of the impeachment motion, which the opposition is planning to bring against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, argues for his removal on grounds of his alleged involvement in the conspiracy of paying illegal gratification to allow admission in a medical college, charge of forgery to alter the date on an administrative order, and allegations of having abused his authority as master of roster to arbitrarily assign politically sensitive cases to select judges.
Also Read
- CJI Ranjan Gogoi's legacy: Eventful start, landmark verdicts, quiet exit
- Ex-CJI Dipak Misra was working under influence of 'external source': Justice Kurian Joseph
- Sabarimala verdict: How Supreme Court sought to quash patriarchy in religion
- CJI Dipak Misra recommends Justice Gogoi as his successor
- Aadhaar, Section 377, Sabarimala judgments to mark CJI Misra's last month
The draft, which the Congress is learnt to have put forth before other opposition parties for their backing, lists as the number one charge against Justice Misra his alleged role in the Prasad Educational Trust case, which relates to allegations of payment of illegal gratification to get judicial sanction for admission of students in a medical college.
“The facts and circumstances relating to the Prasad Educational Trust case, show prima facie evidence suggesting that Chief Justice Dipak Misra may have been involved in the conspiracy of paying illegal gratification in the case, which at least warrants a thorough investigation,” states the draft of the motion.
It charges Misra with having violated the first principle of the Code of Conduct for Judges by not recusing himself from the writ petition which sought an investigation into the matter of alleged payment of illegal gratification in the Prasad Educational Trust case. It notes that Misra dealt with the case on the administrative as well as judicial side even when the writ petition demanded a probe into the matter in which he too was likely to fall within the scope of investigation.
It is also alleged in the proposed motion that Misra appears to have antedated an administrative order dated November 6, 2017, which amounts to a serious act of forgery or fabrication. On November 9, while Court number two was hearing the writ petition filed by Kamini Jaiswal, seeking an investigation into alleged bribery in the Prasad Educational Trust case, the registrar brought an administrative note to the court, which was thereafter ordered to be annexed to the order passed by the court on that date. The draft motion states that while this note is purportedly dated November 6, 2017, it appears to have been antedated and appears to have been prepared and issued on November 9 itself.
The motion lists the allegation that Misra acquired land in Odisha when he was an advocate by giving an affidavit that was found to be false, and despite the orders of the ADM cancelling the allotment in 1985, he surrendered the land only in 2012 after he was elevated to the Supreme Court.
Misra is also charged with having abused his administrative authority as master of roster to arbitrarily assign individual cases of particular advocates in politically sensitive cases to select judges in order to achieve a predetermined outcome.