Should Justice Dinakaran be impeached?

 its taking political turn

a agree with  views of Anil agrawal,

history repeats, forget about the impeachment,  certain political party members  wont support

 Motion of impeachment has been moved and is pending in the Rajya Sabha.

Those who are vociferously expressing themselves in favour of Judge Dinakaran and against the motion are commiting breach of privilege of the House. Such persons by now would have been hauled before the House but because it has taken a political colour in which the ruling party is playing a hidden role, nothing will move.

parliment  to pass alegislation  affirming minimum qulification to become  judge   like dinakaran then there will not be any impeachment our dinakaran  he is fit occupy the cji of india

It appears that heavens will fall in both cases - if he is impeached or is not impeached. There is so much hype as if our entire life depends on this single topic. If there is one instance of corruption, how does it affect an ordinary Indian (sorry Aam Admi)?

 I stand corrected. There is no provision in the Constitution for IMPEACEMENT of a judge of HC/SC. Only President can be impeached.

HC/SC judges can be REMOVED under Art.124(4).

If removal is impeachment, it is a different matter. 

IMPEACHEMENT IS NOT NECESSARY, BUT CONDUCT ENQUIRY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW,FAIR OPPURTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO A PERSON TO SUBMIT HIS VIEWS.

IT IS NOTHING BUT A POLITICAL  U TURNBEING TAKEN AGAINST JUSTICE DINAKARAN. WHAT WRONG HAS DINAKARAN COMMITTED, IS PURCHASING PROPERTY BEFORE HE JOINING THE JUDICIAL IS BEING TAKEN AS A SWORD  WHICH IS NOT CORRECT.

THOSE WHO HAVE SPREAD THESE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST JUSTICE SHOULD BE SCANNED AND PUT TO STRICT SCRUTINY.

Some people are prejudging Dinakaran. Why are we batting in favour or against him? Does the rule of law prevail in this country or there is Rule of Jungle? Some people so vociferously are defending Dinakaran as if their entire life is dependent on this single act. Similarly, others are opposing him on this very premise.

If by due process of law as laid down in Article 124(4) of the Constitution, Dinakaran is removed, what is the problem? What is the other problem if under the same Article the resolution to remove him is not passed?

Earlier, the whole nation had one single point programme - declaration of assets by judges. How has this incident improved the quality of system of administration of justice?

Now Dinakaran episode? Which heavens will collapse if the matter is decided in his favour or against him? You say, Dinakaran is a good man. Others say he is a bad man. Does your or their saying mean anything?

I agree with Anil Agwarwal's view that "If by due process of law as laid down in Article 124(4) of the Constitution,"  THIS IS WHAT EXACTLY WAS SPEAKING ABOUT. THE  CUSTODIAN OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION  WILL DEFENITELY DECIDE AND JUDGE.

 Then why are we crying ourselves hoarse? 

In my free and fair opinion,  he ought to have been impeached and why we are taking stand against or for?      Will he resign?  no he doesn't have any moral or any legal responsibility.  He is a shameless person to the core otherwise, any person who is holding that post ought to have thrown the paper. If nothing works out, he will take up the card of SC/ST and the Govt. will not initiate any action.

 Mobocracy is still far away.

 Justice Lentin of Bombay High Court is remembered for rolling the head of Antulay in cement scandal in late 70s. He was brilliant to the core and his name was suggested for elevation to the Supreme Court (no collegium at that time). The proposal was shot down by a police sub inspector who gave an adverse report against him when in the normal course papers were sent to him for verification of his background. Obviously, the inspector was coerced into writing that report. Justice Lentin himself narrated this incident after his retirement.

 We have become the laughing stock. Mayawati and Buta Singh (who disgraced himself as goernor of Bihar) have jumped into giving it a caste colour (SC/ST).