Ex-SCBA chief rebuts Kapil Sibal's impeachment motion against Allahabad HC judge

New Delhi: Amid the controversy over alleged hate speech by an Allahabad High Court judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, senior advocate and former Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Adish C Aggarwal on Friday defended the judge, saying judges, like all citizens, have the right to freedom of expression.
His remarks came after Rajya Sabha MP and SCBA President Kapil Sibal earlier today submitted an impeachment motion against Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav.
Aggarwala said that while judges must recuse themselves from cases where they have expressed an opinion, the act of a judge speaking on an issue does not, in itself, warrant impeachment.
Aggarwala acknowledged that Justice Yadav's public speech could have been avoided but stressed that it does not justify initiating impeachment proceedings against him.
"I believe this impeachment motion is a calculated move to intimidate the judiciary, and in fact, it threatens the very independence of the judicial system," Aggarwala said.
Aggarwala pointed out that Kapil Sibal is fully aware that such an impeachment motion is unlikely to succeed, as it requires a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament--something that is currently not feasible in the prevailing political climate.
Kapil Sibal had earlier stated, "We have given a notice to the Rajya Sabha Secretary General to impeach Allahabad High Court Judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav. He made an inflammatory speech on December 9 at the High Court premises. We believe he no longer has the right to hold his position and should be removed. This is not a political issue, but an issue of protecting the Constitution and the independence of the judiciary."
Sibal also urged Prime Minister Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah, and leaders of the ruling party to support the motion, claiming that the Supreme Court should order the removal of Justice Yadav and bar him from any further work until a decision is made.
Aggarwala, however, firmly disagreed with the motion, reinforcing that the integrity and independence of the judiciary must be preserved and that the process of impeachment should not be misused for political purposes.