Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL Against Motion To Impeach Justice Shekhar Yadav Over His VHP Event Speech

The Allahabad High Court today DISMISSED a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed against an impeachment motion submitted to the Rajya Sabha Secretary General by 55 MPs seeking the impeachment of Justice Shekhar Yadav over the speech delivered by him at Prayagraj on December 8 at an event organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (Legal Cell).A bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi dismissed the PIL plea filed by Advocate Ashok Pandey after it orally remarked that it was not satisfied with the maintainability of the PIL plea."How this PIL plea is maintainable. Can a PIL plea be filed in this case? The PIL could lie only when the cause is for a vulnerable section of the society," Justice Vidyathi remarked during the Court hearing.Furthermore, Justice Masoodi added that unless the court is satisfied with the maintainability of the PIL plea, it won't proceed ahead and entertain the same.In response to this, though the petitioner sought to argue that the larger issue was regarding whether judges have the fundamental right to speech and expression, the Court was not impressed with this argument as it remarked that the Judge, who is being referred to in the PIL, is not vulnerable and can approach the court, if required.In view of this, the Court dismissed the PIL plea.#AllahabadHighCourt to shortly hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed against an impeachment motion submitted to the Rajya Sabha Secretary General by 55 MPs last year seeking the impeachment of Justice Shekhar Yadav over his controversial speech at a VHP Event. pic.twitter.com/BLX06dhVub— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) January 7, 2025About the PIL pleaThe PIL plea, moved by Advocate Ashok Pandey, prayed for a direction to the Chairman of Rajya Sabha not to act upon the motion moved by Kapil Sibal and 54 other MPs against Justice Shekher Kumar Yadav.The PIL plea argued that whatever Justice Yadav has said, he said it in the capacity of a Hindu on the topics connected to the hearts of Hindus as they affect their day-to-day life.It added that the participants of this meeting were only Hindus, and as such, the words spoken in that meeting can't come in the definition of hate speech given in some public meetings.The PIL plea further stated that the word 'Kathmu**ah' uttered by Justice Yadav during his speech doesn't come under the purview of Hate speech. It argues that he was merely expressing his opinion, possibly as an individual whose relatives or friends have suffered cruelty and torture, both mental and physical, due to 'Kathamu**apan'.“He may be a person whose some of relation or friends have faced torcher due to some incidents of love jehad. He may be a sensitive person who is aggrieved with the legal permission to the Muslims to marry as many as ladies they want without attraction of any penal or civil consequence, he may be a person who moves on the road with open eyes and see the girl child aged even five to six years going to school with hizab. As an advocate and the judge he might have got the information that how the Kathamu**apan is stopping the muslim girls from going to school and college or how the Muslim ladies are being compelled to wear Hizab and Burka by Kathamu**a's. ”Furthermore, the PIL plea submitted that the right to speech and expression, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution, is available to the judges also, and so, some speech made by the judge outside the courtroom cannot be ground to remove a judge from his office.It argued that it is a clear case of misuse of the position by the MPs moving the motion, so apart from rejecting the motion, the MPs should also be warned not to do so in future.“Such a warning is required as the leader of this group means Sri Kapil Sibal is in habit of dictating terms to the judges and those who don't follow it, motion to remove them is moved,” the plea submits.It added that the application before the RS does not describe how the words spoken by Justice Yadav in the meeting with some persons of the Dharm to which he belongs will come into the definition of proven misbehaviour or incapacity.“…in case the words spoken by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav comes under the definition of the Hate Speech then the FIR can be lodged against him but it can not be ground to remove him from the office of judge. The judge can be removed on the ground of proven misbehavior or incapacity as such judge which is missing from the case in hand and so the motion impugned needs to be rejected,” the plea contends.In related news, 4 Days after his controversial speech, the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court changed the judicial roster of Justice Shekhar Yadav (which came into effect on December 16). The Supreme Court Collegium had also summoned him to explain his stand on the entire controversy. The Top Court took note of his speech on December 10.Read Live Law's coverage of his speech here, here and here.Also read : From Believing 'Cow Exhales ...

Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL Against Motion To Impeach Justice Shekhar Yadav Over His VHP Event Speech

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags