The monsoon session of Parliament opened as expected on Monday, marked by disruptions, Opposition walkouts, and routine political sparring. Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed on the need for unity in national interest.
Meanwhile, the political theatre was playing itself out. The air was rife with the expected verbals among the ministers. Rahul Gandhi was visibly upset, claimed media reports. As the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, he alleged that he was not given a fair chance to speak. He claimed that ministers were allotted ample time to express their views.
Elsewhere an unexpected storm was building up: the unexpected resignation of Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar late in the evening. The political establishment was left stunned. The day’s narrative changed. Every other topic seemed irrelevant.
Media outlets highlighted that the announcement of his resignation, citing health concerns, came at 9:25 pm. He submitted his resignation to President Droupadi Murmu, stating in his letter: “To prioritise health care and abide by medical advice, I hereby resign as Vice-President of India, effective immediately, in accordance with Article 67(a) of the Constitution.”
Dhankhar, 74, had assumed office in August 2022 and was expected to serve until 2027.
Congress MP Jairam Ramesh called the resignation “as shocking as it is inexplicable.” Posting on X, Ramesh wrote, “No doubt Mr Dhankar has to give topmost priority to his health. But clearly there is far more to his totally unexpected resignation than meets the eye. This is not the time for speculation though.”
A post from the Vice-President’s Secretariat earlier that afternoon, at 3:53 pm, mentioned that Dhankhar would visit Jaipur on July 23, suggesting his resignation was a last-minute decision. Congress leaders claim he showed no signs of illness during the day. Dhankhar chaired meetings, met with opposition leaders, and conducted proceedings in his usual “jovial mood.”
Ramesh further noted that Dhankhar had scheduled a Business Advisory Committee (BAC) meeting for 1 pm on Tuesday and was also expected to make “major announcements related to the judiciary.”
The moot question is: what changed between those scheduled events and the 9:25 pm resignation?
Media reports claimed that according to Jairam Ramesh, something very serious happened between 1 PM and 4:30 PM to account for the deliberate absence of Shri Nadda and Shri Rijiju from the second BAC yesterday.
Both BJP President JP Nadda and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju were present during the first BAC meeting at 12:30 pm but did not attend the reconvened session at 4:30 pm. Union Minister L. Murugan represented the government in their place.
Sources told media outlets that Ramesh spoke with Dhankhar at 7:30 pm. The Vice-President reportedly said he was with his family and discussing health issues, adding that they would speak again the following day.
The turning point appears to have come earlier in the day during parliamentary proceedings. Before the Rajya Sabha was adjourned at around 4:36 pm, Dhankhar confirmed receiving a motion signed by over 50 MPs in the Upper House to initiate proceedings for the removal of Justice Yashwant Varma under the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
Upon confirmation by Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal that a similar motion had been submitted in the Lok Sabha, Dhankhar directed the Secretary General to verify it and “take necessary steps in this direction.” He noted that when such motions are submitted simultaneously in both Houses, a joint committee is formed by the Rajya Sabha Chairman and the Lok Sabha Speaker to examine the charges.
The motion in the Lok Sabha was bipartisan. It was signed by 152 MPs including BJP members. The motion in the Rajya Sabha had the backing of only Opposition MPs, with no support from the ruling party. Dhankhar chose to act on it nonetheless, and appeared to do so without consulting the government. That move, some believe, triggered discomfort within the ruling establishment.
Government sources told media outlets that Dhankhar accepted the motion “without taking the government into confidence.”
The judiciary had already signaled caution on the matter. On July 21, the Supreme Court declined an urgent hearing on a plea seeking an FIR against Justice Varma in a cash-at-home case. A bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai also rebuked the petitioner for omitting the honorific “Justice” while referring to Varma.
The episode has revived concerns about separation of powers. The judiciary sees any disciplinary action against a sitting judge as falling strictly within its domain. One theory suggests that Dhankhar’s proactive stance on the impeachment motion — seen by some as aligned with the Opposition — may have clashed with the government’s preference to avoid confrontation with the judiciary at this juncture.
Congress leaders suggested that Dhankhar’s impartial conduct had not sat well with some in power. “The BJP doesn’t care about the Constitution or democratic values. Dhankhar ji conducted himself impartially, and that didn’t sit well with many in power. That insult to the Chair [the Nadda remark] hurt him deeply. This has nothing to do with his health,” Bihar MP Pappu Yadav was quoted as saying.
Earlier that day, during a debate on Operation Sindoor, JP Nadda had intervened sharply while Mallikarjun Kharge was speaking. Nadda was heard saying, “Nothing will go on record, only what I say will go on record,” in Dhankhar’s direction. Nadda clarified that his remark was aimed at Opposition members. The Congress however perceived it as a slight to the Chair.
The Congress also highlighted Dhankhar’s consistent push for judicial reforms. The party suggested that he may have seen the Justice Varma case as a crucial opening to advance that agenda.
The full reasons for Dhankhar’s resignation remain unclear. Monday’s events — his role in proceedings, meetings scheduled for the following day, and the apparent rift over handling the impeachment motion — has fanned multiple theories.
Whether more details emerge remains to be seen. For now, a routine session of Parliament has ended in a political surprise, and possibly a constitutional moment of significance.
Also Read: Maharashtra Govt Moves SC Against Acquittal Of Accused In 7/11 Train Blasts http://Maharashtra Govt Moves SC Against Acquittal Of Accused In 7/11 Train Blasts
