Plans by the Supreme Court to initiate an in-house inquiry against Allahabad High Court judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav were halted after the Rajya Sabha Secretariat asserted that such proceedings fall strictly under its constitutional purview.

According to a report by Hindustan Times, the Supreme Court had begun preparing an internal probe after receiving an adverse report from the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court. Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna had taken preliminary steps to evaluate whether Justice Yadav’s conduct merited scrutiny.

However, the apex court's move was brought to a standstill following a categorical letter from the Rajya Sabha in March, which clarified that any such disciplinary process lies exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Rajya Sabha Chairman, and ultimately, the Parliament and the President.

The Rajya Sabha's intervention effectively stalled the judiciary’s inquiry plans. When contacted, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat did not immediately provide details about the next course of action, reported the newspaper.

The controversy stems from Justice Yadav’s speech delivered at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) event on December 8, 2024. In his address, he claimed that India should function according to the wishes of the “majority,” referring to the Hindu population.

He further sparked outrage by using the term “kathmulla” to describe a section of Muslims and criticized practices such as polygamy and triple talaq, calling them “fatal” to the nation.

In response to the remarks, a group of 55 Opposition Members of Parliament submitted a motion in December seeking Justice Yadav’s removal under Article 124(4) of the Constitution, citing misconduct.

Commenting on the matter in February, Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar confirmed the receipt of the notice and emphasized that the authority to act on such motions resides solely with the Rajya Sabha Chair and, if required, the broader parliamentary mechanism.

“The jurisdiction for the stated subject matter constitutionally lies in exclusivity with the Chairman Rajya Sabha and in an eventuality with the Parliament and Honourable President,” he had said in the House, reported The New Indian Express.

The development highlights ongoing tensions between the judiciary and the legislature over institutional boundaries in matters concerning judicial accountability.