Supreme Court’s In-house Inquiry Procedure

Supreme Court’s In-house Inquiry Procedure

The Supreme Court uploaded a statement on its website confirming that a complaint made by the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, YS Jagmohan Reddy, against its senior-most puisne judge, Justice N.V. Ramana, had been dismissed after being dealt with under the court’s in-house procedure.

About the Case

According to a 2003 judgment of the Supreme Court, In-house inquiry is meant only for “the information and satisfaction” of the CJI, and not for the public.

CM of Andhra complained to CJI that Justice Ramana (the senior most judge of the Supreme Court) has been influencing the Andhra Pradesh High Court against his Government.

He also accused that the family members of Justice Ramana were involved in Amaravati land scam. The prior knowledge that Amaravati was to be declared the State’s capital was used for speculative buying of land in Amaravati.

About Supreme Court’s In-house Inquiry Procedure

The Supreme Court has an in-house process to deal with allegations against a judge relating to the discharge of his judicial function, or with regard to his conduct or behaviour outside court.

Under the in-house procedure, when a complaint is received against a High Court judge, the CJI should decide if the issue is frivolous or serious.