Justice Yashwant Varma moves SC against in-house report and removal recommendation

New Delhi: Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma has approached the Supreme Court, challenging the in-house committee’s report that indicted him following the recovery of a large sum of unaccounted cash from his official residence in Delhi.

The development comes amid reports that the Centre is preparing to introduce an impeachment motion in Parliament seeking Justice Varma’s removal from office.

In his plea, Justice Varma has questioned the constitutional validity of the recommendation made by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna for his removal, contending that the move is “unconstitutional and ultra vires.” The petition also challenges the in-house procedure for inquiry against judges, arguing that it establishes a parallel, extra-constitutional mechanism that “derogates” from the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, which vests the power of removal solely in Parliament.

Justice Varma has also pointed out that the in-house procedure lacks the procedural safeguards provided under the Judges (Inquiry) Act.

The controversy began after a fire broke out at Justice Varma’s official residence in Delhi on March 14. According to reports, firefighters discovered bundles of unaccounted cash at the scene. Justice Varma and his wife were away in Madhya Pradesh at the time; only his daughter and elderly mother were present when the fire broke out. Subsequently, a video surfaced allegedly showing bundles of cash burning in the blaze.

The incident triggered allegations of corruption against Justice Varma. He has categorically denied any wrongdoing, calling the situation a conspiracy to frame him. In response, the then CJI initiated an in-house inquiry and set up a three-member committee on March 22, comprising Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, Himachal Pradesh High Court Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia, and Karnataka High Court Justice Anu Sivaraman.

The committee began its probe on March 25 and finalized its report on May 3. The report was submitted to CJI Khanna on May 4. After the panel indicted the judge, the CJI forwarded the report to the President, recommending impeachment.

In the aftermath of the allegations, Justice Varma was transferred back to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, where he was administered the oath of office. However, the CJI has temporarily withdrawn his judicial work.

In his Supreme Court plea, Justice Varma has raised several concerns regarding the fairness of the inquiry. He contends that the in-house procedure was invoked without any formal complaint and criticizes the “unprecedented” public disclosure of allegations through a Supreme Court press release, which he says subjected him to a media trial.

Justice Varma has further alleged that the committee failed to inform him about the procedure it would follow and denied him a chance to respond to the evidence presented. On the matter of the cash found at his residence, he argues that the panel report is silent on the critical questions of ownership and the exact amount recovered.

He also claims that CJI Khanna pressured him to resign or seek voluntary retirement within a restricted timeline, warning that the removal process would otherwise be set in motion.

The petition has been filed through advocate Vaibhav Niti. The case is expected to test the constitutional contours of in-house judicial procedures and could have significant implications for judicial accountability in India.