The impeachment motion specifically highlights statements made by Justice Yadav, such as expressing that India should function according to the wishes of the majority and claiming that the country is "Hindustan." These comments are seen as overtly political and discriminatory, raising serious concerns about the judge's ability to impartially hear cases, especially those involving minorities. The MPs further emphasize that judges, as public servants, must maintain neutrality and avoid expressing personal political views in public spaces. They argue that such behavior undermines the credibility of the judiciary and erodes public trust in the fairness of legal proceedings.

The MPs also cite a 1997 Supreme Court statement on the "Restatement of Values of Judicial Life," which mandates that judges should refrain from engaging in public debates or expressing opinions on political matters, especially those that may come before the courts. According to the MPs, Justice Yadav’s conduct breaches these ethical guidelines and constitutes grounds for impeachment. The motion also underscores that a judge with such publicly expressed biases cannot be expected to deliver fair justice, particularly for minority communities. The issue has also sparked concerns from various quarters, including AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, who questioned the integrity of the judicial system in such a scenario.