Supreme Court Says 'Will Constitute A Bench' To Hear Justice Yashwant Varma's Plea Challenging In-House Inquiry Report On Cash-at-Home Row
The Supreme Court today said it will constitute a bench to hear Justice Yashwant Varma's petition challenging the in-house inquiry committee's report which indicted him in the cash-at-residence row.
The matter was mentioned today before the bench of CJI BR Gavai, Justices K. Vinod Chandran and Joymalya Bagchi.
Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Mukul Rohatgi, Rakesh Dwivedi, Sidharth Luthra and Siddharth Aggarwal, Advocates George Pothan Poothicote, Manisha Singh amongst others appearing for Justice Verma submitted, "we have filed the petition on behalf of the Allahabad High Court Judge. Some constitutional issues are there. I request you to constitute a bench as soon as possible."
CJI responded that it may not be proper for him to take up that matter.
"We will just take a call and constitute a bench," he then told the counsel.
Justice Varma has also challenged the recommendation made by the former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna to the President and the Prime Minister to initiate impeachment proceedings against him.
Justice Varma stated in the petition that the in-house inquiry committee made the findings without giving him a fair opportunity to respond. He alleged that the committee proceeded in a pre-determined fashion and even without finding any concrete evidence, merely drew adverse inferences against him after reversing the burden of proof.
"The Committee failed to notify the Petitioner of its devised procedure, denied him any opportunity to provide inputs on the evidence to be collected, examined witnesses in his absence and provided him with paraphrased statements instead of video recordings (despite availability), selectively disclosed only “incriminating” material, ignored and failed to collect relevant and exculpatory evidence like CCTV footage (despite Petitioner's requests), denied opportunities of personal hearing, did not put any specific/tentative case to the Petitioner, impermissibly reversed the burden of proof without notice to the Petitioner, and effectively hindered any effective defence by the Petitioner," the petition stated.
The issue relates to the accidental discovery of a huge pile of currency notes at an outhouse of the official residence of Justice Varma, then a judge of the Delhi High Court, during a fire-fighting operation on March 14.
After the discovery led to a huge public controversy, the then CJI Sanjiv Khanna constituted an in-house inquiry committee of three judges- Justice Sheel Nagu (then Chief Justice of Punjab & Haryana High Court), Justice GS Sandhawalia (then Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court), and Justice Anu Sivaraman (Judge, Karnataka High Court). Justice Varma was repatriated to the Allahabad High Court and judicial work was withdrawn from him pending the inquiry.
The committee submitted its report to CJI Khanna in May, which the CJI forwarded to the President and the Prime Minister for further action, after Justice Varma refused to heed the CJI's advice to resign.
The 3-judge in-house inquiry committee termed Justice Varma's conduct after the fire incident on March 14 - which led to the discovery of the currency notes - unnatural, leading to certain adverse inferences against him.
After examining 55 witnesses, including Justice Varma and his daughter, and electronic evidence in the form of videos and photographs taken by the members of the fire brigade, the committee held that cash was found in his official premises.
Finding that the storeroom was within the “covert or active control of Justice Varma and his family members”, the committee held that the burden was upon him to explain the presence of cash.
Since the judge could not discharge his burden by offering a plausible explanation, except giving a "flat denial or a bald plea of conspiracy", the committee found sufficient grounds to propose action against him.
The petition has been filed by AoR Vaibhav Niti
Case : XXX v. Union of India | Diary No.38664/2025