Article 61

Article 61 of the Indian Constitution lays down the formal procedure for the impeachment of the President of India, providing a constitutional mechanism to remove the President for violation of the Constitution. This article safeguards the integrity of the nation’s highest office by ensuring that the President remains accountable to the Constitution while maintaining the principle of checks and balances within the democratic framework.

Text of Article 61

Article 61 provides:

1. When a President is to be impeached for violation of the Constitution, the charge shall be preferred by either House of Parliament.
2. No such charge shall be preferred unless—(a) the proposal to prefer such charge is contained in a resolution which has been moved after at least fourteen days’ notice in writing, signed by not less than one-fourth of the total number of members of the House; and(b) such resolution has been passed by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the House.
3. When a charge has been so preferred by one House of Parliament, the other House shall investigate the charge, or cause the charge to be investigated, and the President shall have the right to appear and to be represented at such investigation.
4. If, as a result of the investigation, a resolution is passed by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the House by which the charge was investigated, declaring that the charge has been sustained, the President shall be removed from office from the date on which the resolution is passed.

Nature and Purpose of Impeachment

The impeachment of the President is a constitutional, not a criminal, process. It is a parliamentary procedure designed to remove the President from office if they are found guilty of violating the Constitution. The process reflects the constitutional accountability of the President while maintaining the dignity and independence of the office.

Grounds for Impeachment

The only ground for the impeachment of the President is a “violation of the Constitution.”The Constitution does not explicitly define what constitutes such a violation, leaving it open to interpretation by Parliament and, if necessary, judicial review. This deliberate vagueness allows flexibility to address serious constitutional misconduct, while preventing frivolous or politically motivated impeachments.

Initiation of Impeachment

The impeachment process can be initiated by either House of Parliament—the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha.

1. A 14-day written notice of the intention to move a resolution must be given.
2. The notice must be signed by at least one-fourth of the total members of the House.
3. The resolution can be moved only after the notice period has expired.

This stage ensures that the initiation of impeachment is backed by substantial support and is not undertaken for partisan reasons.

Procedure for Impeachment

The procedure under Article 61 involves four major stages:

1. Preferring the Charge:
   • Either House of Parliament initiates the process by moving a resolution containing the charge of constitutional violation.
   • The resolution must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the total membership of that House.
2. Investigation by the Other House:
   • Once one House passes the resolution, the other House investigates the charge.
   • The President has the right to appear in person or through a representative to defend themselves during the investigation.
3. Resolution by the Investigating House:
   • If the second House, after investigation, passes the resolution by a two-thirds majority of its total membership, the charge is deemed proven.
4. Removal from Office:
   • Once the charge is sustained by both Houses, the President stands removed from office from the date the second resolution is passed.

This two-tier process, requiring an extraordinary majority in both Houses, ensures that impeachment is reserved for only the gravest constitutional breaches.

Characteristics of the Impeachment Process

• Bicameral Participation: Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha must participate, reflecting the federal structure of India.
• High Majority Requirement: The two-thirds majority in both Houses ensures that the process cannot be politically misused.
• President’s Right to Defence: The President can defend themselves personally or through legal representation.
• Finality: Once the prescribed procedure is completed and both Houses pass the resolution, the removal is immediate and final.

Nature of the Process

Impeachment under Article 61 is a quasi-judicial process. It combines the elements of a parliamentary procedure (legislative) and an investigative hearing (judicial). The proceedings are not a criminal trial but a political and constitutional exercise to protect the sanctity of the Constitution.

Key Principles Ensured by Article 61

1. Accountability: Ensures that the President, despite being the head of the State, is not above the Constitution.
2. Rule of Law: Reinforces that every authority, including the President, is bound by constitutional provisions.
3. Checks and Balances: Prevents the misuse of executive authority and maintains equilibrium among the organs of the State.
4. Presidential Dignity: Protects the office of the President from arbitrary or politically motivated removal through a stringent procedure.

Judicial Interpretation and Related Case References

Although no President of India has ever been impeached, various constitutional cases have clarified the underlying principles that would apply to such proceedings:

• K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017): The Supreme Court emphasised the importance of constitutional morality, reinforcing that all constitutional functionaries, including the President, are bound by constitutional ethics.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): The Court held that the President must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers, establishing that violation of this principle could constitute constitutional impropriety.
• Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006): The Court underscored the importance of due process and constitutional compliance, which would equally apply to impeachment procedures.

These cases reflect that while impeachment is a political process, it must always conform to constitutional standards of fairness and legality.

Comparison with Other Democracies

The impeachment process in India shares similarities with that of other democratic nations, such as:

• United States: The U.S. President can be impeached for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanours,” with the House of Representatives initiating proceedings and the Senate conducting the trial.
• India: The sole ground is “violation of the Constitution,” with both Houses of Parliament sharing equal responsibility.

The Indian process is more limited in scope but ensures higher procedural safeguards against political misuse.

Historical Context

Since the adoption of the Constitution in 1950, no Indian President has faced impeachment proceedings. While there have been political controversies, none have escalated to the level of formal impeachment. The existence of Article 61 itself acts as a deterrent, ensuring that the President adheres strictly to constitutional boundaries.

Significance of Article 61

Article 61 holds great constitutional significance as it:

• Ensures the supremacy of the Constitution over all authorities, including the President.
• Provides a legal and procedural safeguard to remove a President only under extreme circumstances.
• Demonstrates India’s commitment to democratic accountability and constitutional governance.
• Prevents arbitrary removal while ensuring that the President cannot act with impunity.

The stringent requirements and high voting thresholds reflect the framers’ intention to protect the office from political instability while preserving constitutional sanctity.

Conclusion

Article 61 of the Indian Constitution provides a comprehensive and balanced procedure for the impeachment of the President. It upholds the fundamental constitutional principle that no individual is above the law, not even the head of the State.