Justice Yashwant Varma Moves SC Against In-house Panel report

NEW DELHI:
In a dramatic turn of events in India’s higher judiciary, Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court has approached the Supreme Court, challenging the findings of an in-house committee that indicted him over the discovery of unaccounted cash at his official residence in Delhi during a fire incident on March 14.

The senior judge, who was serving in the Delhi High Court at the time of the incident, came under scrutiny after charred bundles of cash were allegedly found in a storeroom of his government bungalow. The Supreme Court had released a statement and even uploaded video footage and images showing stacks of partially burnt currency notes recovered by the Delhi Police.

A three-judge in-house panel comprising Chief Justices Sheel Nagu (Punjab & Haryana), G S Sandhawalia (Himachal Pradesh), and Justice Anu Sivaraman (Karnataka) submitted its report on May 4, holding Justice Varma accountable. The then Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, subsequently wrote to the President and Prime Minister recommending Varma’s removal—a move seen as unprecedented in recent judicial history.

With the Monsoon Session of Parliament set to begin on July 21, where the government is expected to table a motion for his removal, Justice Varma has filed a petition urging the apex court to declare CJI Khanna’s recommendation as unconstitutional.

In his plea, Justice Varma has also questioned the legality of the in-house inquiry mechanism itself, arguing that it operates outside the constitutional framework and lacks the due process outlined under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. He alleged the proceedings were “pre-determined,” claiming that the panel denied him the chance to present his version and reversed the burden of proof without any definitive evidence.

“The public disclosure of such sensitive allegations via a Supreme Court press release subjected me to a media trial,” Justice Varma stated, also accusing the panel of procedural opacity and violating principles of natural justice.

He claimed that he was asked to resign or opt for voluntary retirement within a constrained timeline, with an implicit warning of removal proceedings, adding that no formal complaint had been lodged to initiate the probe.

The fire incident, which occurred at 11:35 pm on March 14, was brought under control within 15 minutes. However, the subsequent probe led to widespread speculation about corruption, forcing Justice Varma’s transfer back to the Allahabad High Court and suspension of his judicial responsibilities.

As the legal battle escalates to the Supreme Court, all eyes are now on whether the apex court will revisit the procedures adopted in judicial accountability—potentially reshaping how the Indian judiciary disciplines its own members in the future.