The impeachment motion against Justice GR Swaminathan has sparked a rare and volatile confrontation between India’s political class and the judiciary. It has raised serious questions about constitutional morality. It has also exposed deep ideological tensions in Tamil Nadu. Political observers are concerned whether impeachment is being reshaped into a tool of political retaliation.
What began as a local legal dispute over a symbolically sensitive ritual at the Thiruparankundram hill has rapidly escalated. It has turned into a national debate. The focus, as an editorial has outlined, has shifted to judicial independence.
Political hypersensitivity is now under scrutiny. So too are competing narratives around religious identity.
The controversy centres on an order passed earlier this month by Justice Swaminathan directing that a Hindu devotee be given CISF protection to light a traditional lamp at the Deepathoon structure on Thiruparankundram hill, a site associated both with the Subramaniya Swamy Temple and the Sikandar Badusha Dargah.
For decades, the editorial adds, the hill has occupied a place in Madurai’s cultural memory as a marker of syncretic coexistence.
In recent years, however, the site has become contested, shaped by overlapping religious claims, administrative uncertainty, and political mobilisation. Against this backdrop, Justice Swaminathan’s ruling was viewed by the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government not as a routine legal determination but as an order with the potential to inflame communal sensitivities.
The state government moved a division bench against the ruling but suffered a setback. The bench upheld Justice Swaminathan’s order and criticised the state for filing the appeal only to avoid contempt proceedings.
On the ground in Thiruparankundram, the picture appears markedly different from the political narrative unfolding in Delhi. Temple priests across the state have maintained that the ritual is routine and not provocative. N Mohammed Isbani, a Madurai resident who visits the dargah annually, said most local Muslims do not oppose the lighting of the lamp. What they oppose is the politicisation of the hill, he has reportedly claimed.
According to Isbani, residents of Thiruparankundram, across religious lines, have traditionally viewed the annual Deepam lighting as a peaceful occasion, disrupted only when political actors intervene. K Subramanian, a retired police sub-inspector who earlier handled security arrangements for the event, said the situation needs sensitivity, not symbolism.
None of these local voices anticipated an impeachment motion. Few expected a dispute over a hilltop ritual in Madurai to reach Parliament, or to become enmeshed in national political narratives.
On December 9, MPs from the DMK and its INDIA bloc allies initiated an impeachment motion against Justice Swaminathan, accusing him of ideological bias, undermining communal harmony, and violating the constitutional duty of neutrality.
At least 107 MPs have signed the petition, including Lok Sabha members from DMK allies, AICC General Secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav, NCP-SP leader Supriya Sule, IUML’s Asaduddin Owaisi, among others.
In response, constitutional experts, retired judges, and senior lawyers have cautioned that what is being framed as a defence of secularism risks becoming an assault on judicial independence. They note that the motion does not allege corruption or personal misconduct — the traditional grounds for impeachment — but is largely premised on disagreement with the judge’s reasoning in specific cases.
Impeachment under India’s Constitution is deliberately onerous. It requires the support of at least 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs, followed by an inquiry committee, and approval by a two-thirds majority in both Houses. The mechanism has been invoked only sparingly, and no High Court judge has ever been removed through this process.
The framers of the Constitution envisaged impeachment as a last resort to address corruption, ethical collapse, or grave misconduct that undermines the dignity of judicial office.
If impeachment is deployed in response to judicial decisions, constitutional jurists warn, it could push the judiciary into a perilous zone with long-term consequences for institutional independence.
Also Read: Justice Sandeep Bhatt Of Gujarat High Court Transferred For Going Against The System? https://www.vibesofindia.com/justice-sandeep-bhatt-of-gujarat-high-court-transferred-for-going-against-the-system/
