Kapil Sibal, a senior Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP, led a group of 55 MPs in submitting an impeachment motion against Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, a judge of the Allahabad High Court. The motion, submitted to the Rajya Sabha Secretary General on December 13, is in response to an inflammatory speech made by Justice Yadav on December 9, which the opposition claims promotes communal animosity and violates the secular values enshrined in the Indian Constitution.

According to Sibal, the speech, delivered at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) event, undermines the judiciary's independence and the nation's secular ethos. The opposition MPs argue that such statements are incompatible with the responsibilities of a high-ranking judicial officer, and they believe that Justice Yadav should be removed from his post.

Impeachment Motion Against Justice Yadav:
The impeachment motion calls for Justice Yadav's removal from the Allahabad High Court, citing the inflammatory nature of his speech at the VHP event. Kapil Sibal emphasized that the issue is not political but rather about protecting the Constitution and judicial independence. He urged the Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah, along with other ruling party leaders, to stand with the opposition in defending the Constitution. Sibal further demanded that Justice Yadav should be barred from performing any judicial duties until the motion is reviewed.

The motion also stresses that Justice Yadav’s remarks are a clear violation of India’s secular principles and could potentially fuel communal divides in society, which contradicts the Constitution’s values. The opposition MPs have called for the Supreme Court to intervene and ensure the judge’s removal from his position.

The Significance of the Motion:
The impeachment motion against Justice Yadav reflects ongoing tensions surrounding the judiciary’s role in maintaining the secular fabric of India. The opposition’s stand is that judicial officers must uphold the Constitution’s secular ideals and avoid involvement in promoting any communal ideologies.

While the motion is likely to spark significant political debate, it highlights concerns about the role of judges in safeguarding the democratic and secular principles that India’s Constitution guarantees. Sibal’s statement reiterates the opposition's commitment to preserving these ideals, regardless of political affiliations.

This development comes amid broader calls for accountability in the judiciary, especially regarding statements and actions that may undermine the fundamental values of the Indian state. The motion is likely to draw attention in the coming days as parliamentary debates unfold and legal processes take their course.