No proof, report leaked: Details of Justice Varma's plea against burnt cash case

India Today

6 hours ago

Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court, has petitioned the Supreme Court seeking to quash an in-house inquiry report that found him guilty of misconduct in connection with the alleged recovery of burnt currency from his official residence in Delhi.In his detailed plea, accessed by India Today TV, Justice Varma questioned the entire process, calling it unconstitutional, procedurally flawed, and violative of his fundamental rights. The judge, who has served on the bench for over 11 years, has argued that the inquiry was triggered in the absence of a formal complaint—based solely on presumptive queries about the fire incident and the purported discovery of cash.advertisementAccording to the petition, Justice Varma and his wife were vacationing in Madhya Pradesh when the fire broke out at their Delhi residence. His daughter and mother were at the premises at the time. The Delhi Fire Services and Police, the plea said, neither seized any cash nor drew up a formal panchnama to document the alleged recovery.
"It appears that while attending to / extinguishing the fire, officials of the Delhi Fire Services ('DFS') and Delhi Police ('Police') discovered the presence of burnt currency/cash in the outhouse. They did not seize the alleged cash or prepare a panchnama or otherwise memorialize their discovery in any manner known to law. However, it appears that certain photos/videos were privately taken by some of these officials and formed the basis for events that follow," the plea stated."However, unofficial videos and photographs were circulated, which later formed the basis of widespread speculation and a press release that Justice Varma claims subjected him to a media trial," it added.The judge has also alleged that the in-house committee violated principles of natural justice. Varma said he was never given a personal hearing by the Chief Justice of India and was denied the chance to participate in evidence collection, cross-examine witnesses, or access the full material, including CCTV footage."The Petitioner did not receive any response from the Hon'ble CJI and was not afforded any personal hearing in the matter," it said.Furthermore, the plea argued that the inquiry "did not clearly lay out a specific or tentative case against him", nor did it probe crucial facts, such as "who placed the cash, its quantity, ownership, source, or the actual cause of the fire". Instead, the findings rested on inferences, not direct evidence, Justice Varma contended.Justice Varma has also questioned the constitutional validity of the in-house procedure itself. "By culminating in recommendations for removal from constitutional office, it creates a parallel, extra-constitutional mechanism that derogates from the mandatory framework under Articles 124 and 218 of the Constitution, which exclusively vest powers for removal of Judges of the High Courts in Parliament through an address supported by a special majority, following an inquiry under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968," the plea stated.advertisementThe judge's petition also pointed out that the final report was leaked to the media before he could formally respond, causing "irreparable harm" to his reputation and dignity."Unprecedented public disclosure of these unverified allegations via press release by this Hon'ble Court on 22.03.2025 subjected the Petitioner to media trial, resulting in irreparable damage to his personal reputation and career as a judicial officer," Justice Varma said.He also said that he was given barely two days to reply to the committee's findings and was asked to resign or retire within that short window.Justice Varma now wants the Supreme Court to declare the final report, the Chief Justice's recommendation to the President and Prime Minister, and all subsequent actions as 'unconstitutional' and "ultra vires". He argued that the process used against him sets a dangerous precedent by allowing the judiciary to bypass constitutional safeguards and statutory procedures meant to protect judges from arbitrary removal.The controversy dates back to March 2025, when a large quantity of burnt or partially burnt cash was allegedly found at his official residence in Delhi following a fire. Then serving with the Delhi High Court, Justice Varma has consistently denied any link to the cash, describing the episode as a conspiracy to frame him.In May 2025, then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna forwarded a recommendation to Parliament, urging impeachment proceedings against Justice Varma based on the committee's report — a recommendation Varma now wants to be struck down by the apex court.- EndsMust Watch