Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court and former Delhi High Court judge, has moved the Supreme Court seeking to quash an in-house inquiry report that allegedly linked him to charred cash recovered from his official residence in March 2025. The report, which cited ‘strong inferential evidence’ of his involvement, had formed the basis for a recommendation to Parliament to initiate impeachment proceedings against him.
In a writ petition filed on Thursday, Justice Varma challenged both the report and the May 8 recommendation by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna. He termed the inquiry process ‘fundamentally flawed,’ arguing that it violated his constitutional rights and denied him a fair and full hearing.
Fire Incident and Discovery of Cash Sparked Controversy
The controversy erupted on March 14 when a fire broke out in the outhouse of Justice Varma’s government residence in Delhi. Firefighters responding to the incident reportedly discovered charred currency notes stuffed in sacks. The then Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court flagged the issue to the CJI, prompting the formation of a three-member inquiry panel on March 22.
Inquiry Panel Found ‘Inferential Evidence’ of Control
The panel, comprising Justices Sheel Nagu, GS Sandhawalia, and Anu Sivaraman, submitted its report on May 3. While acknowledging that there was no direct evidence linking Justice Varma to the money, the committee noted ‘strong inferential evidence’ of his ‘covert or active control’ over the cash. It concluded that his conduct represented a serious breach of judicial ethics and recommended his impeachment.
The report stated: ‘The presence of burnt cash in his storeroom was established. The burden shifted to Justice Varma to account for the money by giving a plausible explanation which he failed to do, beyond a flat denial and vague allegations of conspiracy.’
Denial of Natural Justice
Justice Varma has fiercely contested the findings and procedure. His petition alleges that the panel operated on a pre-decided narrative and ignored crucial facts including the need to establish ownership and authenticity of the cash. He claims he was denied an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or present a full defense, thereby breaching principles of natural justice.
‘The inquiry reversed the burden of proof,’ he stated in his petition. ‘It expected me to disprove allegations, instead of the committee establishing facts.’
Refuses to Resign
Following the panel’s recommendation, then CJI Khanna advised Justice Varma to step down voluntarily. In a letter dated May 6, Justice Varma refused to resign, asserting that doing so would amount to an admission of guilt in a process he called ‘outcome-driven and procedurally unsound.’
On May 8, the Supreme Court acknowledged Justice Varma’s response but stood by the committee’s conclusion. He was relieved of judicial responsibilities and transferred to the Allahabad High Court.
Impeachment in Monsoon Session
With Parliament’s monsoon session set to begin on July 21, the Union government is preparing to initiate formal impeachment proceedings. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju has confirmed that Opposition parties have been approached for support, while Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal is expected to introduce the motion.
Vice President Questions Validity
Adding a layer of constitutional debate, Vice President and Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar questioned the legal standing of the in-house inquiry at a public event in May. He suggested that a criminal investigation, not a judicial probe, would be more appropriate for such allegations.
