Latest news with #CPIO
India Today
26-05-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Judge cash row: Supreme Court refuses to make findings of probe report public
The Supreme Court of India has denied an application filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, that sought access to the internal investigation report concerning the discovery of a large amount of cash at the official residence of Justice Yashwant RTI application, submitted by Amritpal Singh Khalsa, requested a copy of the report prepared by the internal inquiry committee and the letter written by the Chief Justice of India to the President and Prime Minister forwarding the said report. The application was dismissed by the Supreme Court's Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) on May the legal principles established in the Supreme Court of India vs. Subhash Chandra Agrawal case, the CPIO stated that the requested information could not be disclosed. The RTI Cell also invoked relevant sections 8(1)(e) and 11(1) of the RTI Act to justify the denial. Section 8(1)(e) prohibits disclosure of information held in a fiduciary capacity unless it serves a larger public interest. Section 11 exempts information relating to third parties from a written response dated May 21, the Additional Registrar and CPIO of the Supreme Court reiterated that the information could not be response cited the November 13, 2019 judgment in CPIO, Supreme Court of India vs Subhash Chandra Agrawal, referencing key legal considerations including judicial independence, the proportionality test, fiduciary relationships, the right to privacy, and the duty of internal inquiry was initiated following a fire on the night of March 14 at Justice Varma's official residence, during which a significant amount of cash was discovered by authorities in the store room of the the time, Justice Varma was serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court. He was later transferred to the Allahabad High Court, and judicial work was withdrawn from him on the directive of the Chief Justice of the preliminary report by the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court and Justice Varma's response, along with photos and videos taken by the Delhi Police, were made public via the Supreme Court's website, the final investigation report was not made by Sanjay SharmaMust Watch
News18
26-05-2025
- Politics
- News18
Supreme Court Junks RTI Plea Seeking In-House Inquiry Report On Justice Varma Cash Row
Last Updated: The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the top court rejected the application, filed by Maharashtra-based advocate Amritpal Singh Khalsa. The Supreme Court has rejected an application under Right To Information (RTI) Act, seeking to make public the in-house inquiry committee's report linked with the alleged cash recovery from the house of former Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma. Former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had forwarded the report along with a letter to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi earlier this month. The apex court has also refused to release a copy of that letter. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the top court rejected the application, filed by Maharashtra-based advocate Amritpal Singh Khalsa, saying that the report cannot be provided in view of the decision in the Subhash Chandra Agarwal case. According to Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship is exempted from disclosure unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information. According to Section 11 of the act, third-party information is exempted from disclosure. 'The information cannot be provided in view of tests outlined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated 13.11.2019 passed in Civil Appeal Nos.10044- 45/2010 (СPIO, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (2020) 5 SCС 481) viz. independence of judiciary, proportionality test, fiduciary relationship, invasion of the right to privacy and breach of duty of confidentiality etc. with reference to provisions of Section 8(1)(e) and Section 11(1) of the RTI Act, 2005," the Additional Registrar said in the reply as reported by Bar and Bench. The Supreme Court had ordered an in-house probe into the alleged discovery of half-burnt cash. Earlier this month, the committee submitted its report to the Chief Justice. 'The three-member Committee consisting of Mr Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Mr Justice G S Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, and Ms Justice Anu Sivaraman, Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, constituted for conducting an inquiry into the allegations against Mr Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting Judge, has submitted its report dated 03.05.2025 to the Chief Justice of India on 04.05.2025," said a release issued by the top court. While the preliminary report of the Delhi High Court Chief Justice and the response of Justice Varma, along with the photos and videos taken by the Delhi Police, were publicised by uploading them on the Supreme Court's website, the final iquiry report was not made public. (With inputs from agencies)
NDTV
26-05-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
Top Court Refuses To Make Public In-House Panel's Findings In Judge Cash Row
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has refused to make public the findings of the court-appointed panel into the alleged cash recovery from the house of former Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, through the RTI mechanism. Former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had forwarded the findings along with a letter to the President and the Prime Minister. The court has also refused to release a copy of that letter. This follows an RTI application being filed with the court's information officer seeking these details. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) rejected the application, saying that it cannot be provided in view of the decision in the Subhash Chandra Agarwal case. In the 2019 landmark judgment, the Supreme Court highlighted the need for a balance between the right to privacy and the right to information under the Constitution. Rejecting the latest application, the CPIO also cited provisions of the RTI Act, including sections 8(1)(e) and 11. Both provisions suggest that such third-party information can be disclosed only if the competent authority is satisfied that it's in the public interest. The case deals with the alleged recovery of a huge stash of cash during a fire incident at the residence of Justice Varma in Lutyens' Delhi on March 14. The burnt cash was allegedly found in a storeroom near the servants' quarters. Justice Varma was reportedly in Bhopal at that time along with his wife. The Supreme Court had on March 22 formed a three-judge committee to conduct an in-house inquiry into the matter. The panel comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chief Justice G S Sandhawalia of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, and Justice Anu Sivaraman of the Karnataka High Court, finalised its report on May 3. It submitted the report to the then Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, a day later. In prompt action, the court had also taken away judicial work from Justice Varma at the Delhi High Court. It later transferred him to his parent Allahabad High Court and asked its Chief Justice not to assign any judicial work to him. In an unprecedented move, the court had also uploaded photos and videos of the cash allegedly recovered from Justice Varma's house. The judge had denied that he or his family members ever kept cash in the storeroom. He had also said that the room was accessible to all.
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
SC rejects RTI plea seeking report on Justice Yashwant Varma inquiry, cites fiduciary limits and privacy
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has rejected an application filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, seeking access to the in-house inquiry committee report concerning allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma, Live Law reported. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court also declined to disclose a letter written by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to the President and the Prime Minister forwarding the said report. The application, submitted on May 9 by Amritpal Singh Khalsa, was turned down by the Supreme Court's Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), citing key legal exemptions. In a reply dated May 21, the CPIO referred to the Supreme Court's 2019 judgment in CPIO, Supreme Court of India vs Subhash Chandra Agarwal and Sections 8(1)(e) and 11(1) of the RTI Act. Section 8(1)(e) exempts information held in a fiduciary capacity unless a larger public interest is established, while Section 11 protects third-party information from disclosure. 'The information cannot be provided… with reference to independence of judiciary, proportionality test, fiduciary relationship, invasion of the right to privacy and breach of duty of confidentiality,' the Additional Registrar and CPIO stated in the reply, reported Live Law. The in-house inquiry was initiated after a large sum of cash was accidentally discovered in a store-room attached to Justice Varma's official residence during a firefighting operation. At the time, he was serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court. In response, then CJI Sanjiv Khanna constituted a three-member committee on March 22 comprising Justice Sheel Nagu (CJ, Punjab & Haryana HC), Justice GS Sandhawalia (CJ, Himachal Pradesh HC), and Justice Anu Sivaraman (Karnataka HC). Tired of too many ads? go ad free now On May 8, the CJI forwarded the committee's report to the President and Prime Minister for further action. Meanwhile, Justice Varma was transferred to the Allahabad High Court—his parent HC—and judicial work was withdrawn from him as per CJI's directive. Though the preliminary report of the Delhi High Court Chief Justice, Justice Varma's response, and visual documentation from the Delhi Police were uploaded to the Supreme Court website, the final inquiry report remains confidential.
