Read Time: 06 minutes
According to newspaper reports, a fire broke out at his residence, prompting his family to call the fire department and police. During the firefighting efforts, authorities reportedly discovered Rs. 15 crores of unaccounted cash inside a room, leading to the registration of official entries regarding the recovery.
The Delhi High Court, recently, issued a formal notice stating that all matters listed before the Bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, where no judicial orders had been passed, would be heard afresh before the appropriate Roster Bench.
In response to the incident, the Chief Justice of India, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, constituted a three-member committee to investigate the allegations against Justice Varma. The panel included Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court; Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court; and Justice Anu Sivaraman, Judge of the Karnataka High Court. The Supreme Court also directed the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court to refrain from assigning any judicial work to Justice Varma until further notice.
The statement also clarified that the proposal to transfer Justice Varma back to the Allahabad High Court, where he previously served before his 2021 appointment to the Delhi High Court, was entirely separate from the ongoing inquiry. The Supreme Court Collegium had examined the proposal for transfer on March 20, 2025, and subsequently sought inputs from the concerned judges, Chief Justices of the respective High Courts, and Justice Varma himself.
Meanwhile, the High Court Bar Association (HCBA) in Allahabad expressed strong objections to the transfer, questioning whether the Allahabad High Court was being used as a repository for judges facing serious allegations. The Bar Association termed the move an affront to the dignity of the institution and the principles of accountability.
On March 24, 2025, Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara filed a petition before the Supreme Court seeking registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against Justice Varma. The petitioner argued that the recovery of approximately ₹15 crores in unaccounted cash from Justice Varma’s residence constituted a cognizable offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and warranted immediate registration of an FIR.
The petition further contended that the requirement of CJI’s prior approval violated the constitutional principle of equality before the law. It asserted that such exemptions did not extend to judges and that every citizen, regardless of position, must be held accountable under criminal law. The plea warned that reliance solely on an internal inquiry could damage public confidence in the judiciary.
On 5th April 2025, Justice Varma took the oath of office at the Allahabad High Court. However, the HCBA criticized the manner in which the oath was administered. In a letter to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, the association described the ceremony as ‘clandestine’ and lacking transparency. The letter alleged that the legal fraternity and even most High Court judges were not informed or invited to the event.
As of March 29, the Bar Association suspended its strike, awaiting the outcome of the inquiry ordered by the Chief Justice of India.
Please Login or Register
