Notice against Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav pending, 50 MPs confirm signing

Of the remaining 10, The Indian Express was told by six MPs that they had signed the notice. Three MPs could not be reached for comment and one, AAP’s Sanjeev Arora, said he was busy with the Ludhiana West by-elections.

Sources said the notice has not been rejected by Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar as there is no timeframe for deciding on the notice submitted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

A minimum of 50 MPs in the Rajya Sabha or 100 in the Lok Sabha are required for the notice of motion to impeach a judge, as per the Act.

The notice was submitted by 54 MPs in December last year. Out of those 54 MPs, 43 MPs had responded to emails or phone calls by the secretariat to confirm their signatures as of 5 pm on May 23, The Indian Express has learnt. Of the remaining 11 MPs, at least two said they had verified their signatures to the secretariat over the phone when contacted for comment by The Indian Express. Rajya Sabha sources confirmed Monday that one of those MPs, Ajit Kumar Bhuyan, had verified his signature since then.

Among the MPs who had not authenticated their signatures as on May 23 were Kapil Sibal, P Chidambaram, Sushmita Dev, Sanjeev Arora, Ajit Kumar Bhuyan, Jose K Mani, Faiyaz Ahmed, Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, G C Chandrasekhar, Raghav Chadha and N R Elango.

When contacted, Sibal said: “I met him (Chairman) several times, he never asked me about the signature. I do not know which email ID they have sent the mail to. I am the one who presented the notice to him with the signatures.”

He said if the Chairman is not able to confirm the signatures, he should reject it. “So that we can go to the Supreme Court.”

Chidambaram said he had signed the notice, but denied that the Rajya Sabha secretariat had contacted him for verification.

G C Chandrasekhar of the Congress said he has done the verification over the phone already. Bhuyan, an Independent MP from Assam, too, told The Indian Express that he had verified his signature. “I got a call some 15-20 days ago asking if I had signed and I confirmed that I had,” he said.

Kerala Congress MP Jose K Mani said he had signed the notice and would verify it soon. CPI-M MP Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya said, “There is no question of any doubt about my signature in the notice. I will be writing soon to verify the signature.”

Sushmita Dev of the TMC said she had signed the notice along with other MPs.

While Sanjeev Arora of the AAP said he was busy with the by-elections in Ludhiana West, Chadha is learnt to have requested for a meeting with the Chairman in response to the Rajya Sabha Secretariat’s emails for verification. Chadha could not be reached for comment.

RJD MP Faiyaz Ahmad and DMK MP NR Elango could not be reached for comment.

The Opposition MPs had submitted the notice on December 13 with 55 signatures, with Sibal, Vivek Tankha and KTS Tulsi handing it over. Sibal and Tankha were among the signatories. According to Rajya Sabha sources, the secretariat found a mismatch in nine signatures on the notice compared to the signatures of the MPs as per records. The signature of one MP, Sarfaraz Ahmed, appeared in two places, leading to the decision to verify all signatures. He is believed to have told the Rajya Sabha secretariat that had only signed once, taking the total number of signatures to 54.

The Rajya Sabha secretariat then sent emails on three occasions – March 7, March 13 and May 1 – asking the MPs to meet the Chairman regarding the notice and bring along the authenticated copies of the relevant documents. The MPs were asked to “make it convenient to have an interaction with the Chairman, Rajya Sabha,” the March 7 email said.

Of the 54, 29 MPs then verified their signatures after meeting the Chairman. Later, the secretariat called the remaining MPs on May 23 and 14 of them also confirmed their signatures. Eleven MPs could not be reached on phone that day, sources said.

The MPs were also asked to authenticate the copies of the “news articles, legal reports, YouTube videos etc”, which they had annexed with their notice. “These documentation may kindly be brought along with, duly authenticated,” the email message sent to the MPs in March said, adding that it is necessary since the MPs have submitted a list of news articles and links to prove that Justice Yadav had made “outrageous” remarks.

On February 13, Chairman Dhankar made a remark in the Upper House that he had received “55 purported signatures” seeking the removal from office of Justice Shekhar Yadav of Allahabad High Court under Article 124 (4) of the Constitution.

“The jurisdiction for the stated subject matter constitutionally lies exclusively with the Chairman, Rajya Sabha and, in eventuality, with the Parliament and Honorable President,” he has said. Rajya Sabha Secretary General P C Mody has then conveyed these remarks to the Secretary General of the Supreme Court on February 17 “for information.”

Speaking at a VHP event on December 8 last year, Justice Yadav had said: “I have no hesitation in saying that this is Hindustan… and the country will run according to the majority who live in Hindustan.”

Supporting a Uniform Civil Code, he referred to the Muslim community, and said: “You have a misconception that if a law (UCC) is brought in, it will be against your Shariyat, your Islam and your Quran… But I want to say one more thing… Whether it is your personal law, our Hindu law, your Quran or whether it is our Gita, as I said we have addressed the ills (buraaiyan) in our practices.” He said untouchability, sati, jauhar and female foeticide had been addressed. “Then why are you not doing away with… that while your first wife is there… you can have three wives… without her consent… that is not acceptable.