The Supreme Court on Monday rigorously questioned Justice Yashwant Varma regarding his petition seeking to invalidate the in-house inquiry panel’s report that indicted him for the discovery of a large cache of burnt cash at his official residence during his tenure at the Delhi High Court.
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Justice Varma, why the judge had cooperated with the inquiry committee in the first place.
Court’s Questionnaire
“Why did you appear before the inquiry committee? Did you approach the court to have the video removed? Why wait until the inquiry concluded and the report was published? Were you hoping for a favorable outcome there first?” the bench asked.
Court also questioned the list of parties named in Justice Varma’s plea and pointed out that he should have filed the full inquiry report along with his petition.
Advocate Sibal argued that under Article 124 of the Constitution, which governs the Supreme Court’s establishment and functioning, a judge cannot be subjected to public debate. He emphasized, “The release of the video on the Supreme Court website, the ensuing public outrage, and media allegations against judges are prohibited by the constitutional framework.”
The bench asked Sibal to submit a concise one-page summary and correct the petition’s list of parties.
Justice Varma’s petition seeks to quash May 8 recommendation made by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna to initiate impeachment proceedings against him. The plea argues that the inquiry improperly shifted the burden of proof onto Justice Varma, requiring him to disprove allegations rather than the panel proving them.
He alleged that the inquiry was driven by a predetermined narrative and was rushed to conclude, sacrificing procedural fairness. The petition contended that the panel arrived at adverse findings without giving him a fair and complete opportunity to defend himself.
The inquiry report had found that Justice Varma and his family members had either covert or direct control over the storeroom where a significant amount of half-burnt cash was discovered after a fire at his official residence. The panel concluded this amounted to serious misconduct warranting removal.
The inquiry was conducted by a three-judge panel led by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Over 10 days, they examined 55 witnesses and visited the site of the accidental fire, which occurred around 11:35 pm on March 14, when Justice Varma was a sitting Delhi High Court judge. He now serves at the Allahabad High Court.
Based on the inquiry’s findings, then CJI Khanna recommended to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi that impeachment proceedings be initiated against Justice Varma.
The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on July 30.
(Inputs By Sambhav Sharma)
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
