Justice Yashwant Varma, a judge formerly on the tax bench of the Delhi High Court, has approached the Supreme Court challenging the findings of an internal judicial inquiry that recommended his impeachment over alleged misconduct linked to a cache of charred currency found at his official residence earlier this year.
In a writ petition filed on Thursday, Justice Varma sought to invalidate the May 8 recommendation made by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna to Parliament, which urged impeachment proceedings based on a report by a three-member in-house panel. He contended that the report was “unsustainable,” arguing that it was prepared through a process that grossly violated his constitutional and legal rights.
The development comes just ahead of the Monsoon Session of Parliament, scheduled to begin on July 21, where the government is expected to initiate the formal process of impeachment, with support from sections of the Opposition.
Justice Varma, who had presided over tax matters at the Delhi High Court before being transferred to the Allahabad High Court, argued in his petition that the inquiry was conducted in a prejudiced and hurried manner. He alleged that the panel — comprising Justice Sheel Nagu, Justice GS Sandhawalia, and Justice Anu Sivaraman — relied on inferential findings without granting him adequate opportunity to present his defence.
The controversy began on March 14 when a fire broke out in the outhouse of Justice Varma’s official residence in Delhi. Firefighters reportedly found charred bundles of cash stuffed in sacks. The then Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court flagged the incident to CJI Khanna, who formed the three-judge inquiry panel on March 22.
The panel submitted its report on May 3, concluding that while no direct evidence linked Justice Varma to the cash, “strong inferential evidence” suggested his “covert or active control” over it. The report stated that once the presence of the cash was established in his premises, the burden shifted to the judge to provide a plausible explanation — which he failed to do, offering only a blanket denial and claiming a conspiracy.
Justice Varma has strongly rebutted these findings. He maintained that while some currency may have been found in the outhouse, crucial facts surrounding its ownership and authenticity were never properly investigated. The report, he claimed, reversed the burden of proof and adopted an outcome-driven approach, disregarding principles of natural justice.
In a letter dated May 6, Justice Varma had rejected an earlier suggestion by the CJI to resign or retire voluntarily. He argued that doing so would amount to validating an unjust and procedurally flawed inquiry.
After the panel’s findings were made public, Justice Varma was stripped of his judicial duties and transferred to the Allahabad High Court. A copy of the panel’s report and a letter from CJI Khanna were forwarded to the President and Prime Minister, recommending that impeachment proceedings be initiated.
The issue has since taken on political overtones. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju confirmed that the government had reached out to Opposition parties to build consensus around the impeachment motion. Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal is expected to move the motion in Parliament.
Meanwhile, Vice President and Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar, in a public address on May 19, questioned the legal basis of the in-house inquiry process itself. He described it as “inconsequential” and suggested that a formal criminal investigation might be more appropriate in such cases.
Adding to the political complexity, a section of the Opposition’s INDIA bloc is reportedly reviving its push to impeach another controversial judge — Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court — over a past speech at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event. An earlier notice for impeachment was submitted by 55 MPs on December 13, 2024, but no action has been taken since the Rajya Sabha secretariat asserted exclusive jurisdiction in the matter, prompting the Supreme Court to back off from launching its own inquiry.
Opposition leaders such as Kapil Sibal, Jairam Ramesh, and Saket Gokhale have raised concerns over the government’s selective approach, questioning why no action has been taken against Justice Yadav while pushing for swift proceedings against Justice Varma.
Read More: GSTN to Reinstate Non-Editable Auto-Populated Table 3.2 in GSTR-3B from July 2025
