Representatives from the Allahabad High Court, its Lucknow bench, Gujarat High Court, Karnataka High Court, and the Jabalpur bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court met Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and other senior judges to discuss their concerns.
![[Breaking] Bar Association Presidents Meet Chief Justice of India Over Justice Yashwant Varma’s Transfer Issue](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Yashwant-Varma-1.webp?resize=820%2C461&ssl=1)
New Delhi: Today, 27th March, Presidents of Bar Associations from multiple High Courts have approached the Supreme Court regarding the transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma.
Representatives from the Allahabad High Court, its Lucknow bench, Gujarat High Court, Karnataka High Court, and the Jabalpur bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court met Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and other senior judges to discuss their concerns.
![[Breaking] Bar Association Presidents Meet Chief Justice of India Over Justice Yashwant Varma’s Transfer Issue](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/CJI-Khanna-1.webp?resize=820%2C461&ssl=1)
The primary issue raised by these Bar Association leaders is that Justice Yashwant Varma should not be transferred to any other High Court. The legal fraternity has expressed strong opposition to any potential transfer of the judge.
Anil Tiwari, President of the Allahabad High Court Bar Association, voiced his firm stance, stating, “Justice Varma should not be transferred to any other High Court and FIR should be registered immediately.”
The Bar leaders insist that the matter requires urgent attention and resolution at the highest judicial level. They argue that Justice Yashwant Varma’s presence in his current court is crucial, and any move to transfer him would be unfair.
CJI Khanna later agreed to meet the heads of Bar Associations.
In their letter, the associations have demanded accountability and a thorough investigation into the cash recovery from Justice Varma’s residence at 30, Tughlaq Crescent. They have also urged that the report by Delhi High Court Chief Justice DK Upadhyay be made public and called for clear guidelines on judicial accountability.
The Bar Associations have requested the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court Collegium to revoke Justice Varma’s transfer and withdraw all administrative responsibilities, in addition to the judicial work already reassigned.
“The Presidents of the Bar Association will meet at Allahabad in the event of non-withdrawal of the transfer order of Justice Yashwant Varma to show solidarity with the High Court Bar Association of Allahabad,” a joint statement read.
The statement comes even as the Allahabad High Court Bar Association is against the transfer of Justice Varma to his parent court after he was de-rostered by the Delhi High Court following a directive from Chief Justice of India.
A petition submitted to the Supreme Court of India, requesting the registration of an FIR against Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court following the alleged discovery of illicit cash at his official residence.
Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara brought the matter before Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna.
A co-petitioner noted that if a similar situation involved an ordinary citizen, multiple investigative agencies, such as the CBI and ED, would have pursued the case vigorously.
The Chief Justice stated,
“This is quite enough. The plea will be taken up accordingly,”
The plea, filed by Nedumpara and three others on Sunday, also challenges the 1991 judgment in the K. Veeraswami case, which ruled that no criminal proceedings against high court or Supreme Court judges could commence without prior approval from the Chief Justice of India.
During the proceedings, Chief Justice Khanna acknowledged that the petition was set for a hearing and urged caution regarding public statements related to the issue. In reply, Nedumpara stressed the necessity of filing an FIR against Justice Varma, praising the Chief Justice for his transparency in releasing related video records.
A co-petitioner pointed out the perceived inconsistency in how judicial figures are treated compared to others, noting that similar findings at a businessman’s residence would generally lead to immediate action from enforcement agencies.
Previously, The Allahabad High Court Bar Association (HCBA) passed a resolution on Monday calling for the initiation of impeachment proceedings against Delhi High Court Judge Justice Yashwant Varma.
This resolution adopted during a meeting held on Monday afternoon, where the Bar Association expressed its firm opposition to any proposal from the Supreme Court Collegium regarding Justice Varma’s transfer back to the Allahabad High Court.
The Supreme Court bench decided not to engage in further immediate discussions but confirmed that the matter would be officially listed by the Registry shortly. This legal action contests the Chief Justice’s decision to initiate an in-house investigation by a three-judge panel instead of pursuing a standard criminal investigation.
The petition contends that the directive established by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of K. Veeraswami v. Union of India which requires consultation with the Chief Justice of India before initiating criminal proceedings against sitting judges of higher courts creates excessive judicial immunity, which is contrary to the public interest.
The petitioners argue that opting for an in-house inquiry instead of a formal police investigation undermines public trust and damages the reputation of the judiciary. They point to historical precedents involving judges implicated in criminal activities, highlighting the necessity for accountability that goes beyond internal reviews.
The petition seeks multiple outcomes, including a declaration that the discovered cash constitutes a cognizable offense, a directive for the Delhi Police to file an FIR, and a call for the government to implement strong measures against judicial corruption, such as reviving the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill.
