The Supreme Court on Monday posed tough questions to Justice Yashwant Varma, currently serving in the Allahabad High Court, regarding his petition challenging the findings of an in-house inquiry panel that indicted him over the recovery of a large amount of half-burnt cash from his official residence during his tenure as a judge of the Delhi High Court.
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih interrogated the basis and timing of Justice Varma’s challenge, directing sharp questions at senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared on the judge’s behalf. “Why did you appear before the inquiry committee? Did you approach the court at that time to have the video [of the incident] removed? Why did you wait for the inquiry to conclude and the report to be released? Were you hoping for a favourable outcome from the committee first?” the bench asked.
The court also questioned Justice Varma's decision to not include the in-house committee report as part of his petition and pointed out that the parties named in the plea were improperly listed. The bench directed Sibal to revise the memo of parties and to submit a one-page summary outlining the key points of the petition. The matter was adjourned and will be heard next on July 30.
During the hearing, Sibal argued that there exists a constitutional process under Article 124 for dealing with allegations against a sitting judge of the High Court or Supreme Court, and that such matters should not become subjects of public discourse. He also took objection to the publication of related video footage on the Supreme Court’s website, asserting that public uproar and media trials against judges violate the constitutional framework. “The release of video on the Supreme Court website, public furore, and media accusations against judges are prohibited as per the constitutional scheme,” he said.
Also Read: Speaker to announce panel to probe charges against Justice Varma
Justice Varma’s petition seeks to quash the May 8 recommendation by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, urging the Parliament to initiate impeachment proceedings against him. According to the petition, the in-house inquiry was procedurally flawed and prejudiced. He alleged that the panel reversed the burden of proof, effectively requiring him to disprove the charges instead of placing the onus on the accusers. He further claimed that the inquiry’s findings were shaped by a preconceived narrative, and that the urgency to wrap up the proceedings compromised his right to a fair and impartial hearing.
The in-house committee's report, which Justice Varma is contesting, concluded that he and his family had either covert or active control over a storeroom where a large cache of half-burnt currency was discovered following a fire incident. The panel stated that this amounted to serious misconduct, warranting his removal from judicial office.
The inquiry was conducted by a three-judge committee headed by Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu. The committee operated for 10 days, during which it examined 55 witnesses and conducted an on-site inspection of the fire incident, which occurred at approximately 11:35 p.m. on March 14 at Justice Varma’s official residence in Delhi. Based on the findings of the report, the then Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, formally wrote to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, recommending that impeachment proceedings be initiated against Justice Varma.
Also Read: SC to hear Justice Varma plea against panel report on July 28
Follow us
