Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla said the report on allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma will be tabled during the Monsoon Session beginning July 20. The outcome could decide whether resignation shields judges from parliamentary action over alleged misconduct.
Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla stated that the report of a three-member committee investigating corruption allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma will be tabled in the Lok Sabha during the Monsoon Session starting on July 20.
What is the Justice Varma case?
The Justice Varma case refers to a high-profile corruption scandal and an ongoing constitutional crisis involving Justice Yashwant Varma, a former judge of the Delhi High Court who was later transferred to the Allahabad High Court.
The controversy began after a large quantity of unexplained cash was reportedly found at his official residence. Parliament then moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against him.
ALSO READ: Removal of Sitting Judges in India: Process and Notable Impeachment Cases
Timeline and key events
- In March 2025, an accidental fire occurred at Justice Varma’s official government bungalow in New Delhi. During the response, firefighters and emergency workers reportedly discovered sacks and wads of half-burnt, unaccounted currency notes hidden in a storeroom. Early estimates suggested the amount could be around Rs.15 crore.
- Justice Varma denied any knowledge of the money. He claimed the storeroom was a “general dumping area” and alleged that there was a conspiracy to harm his reputation.
- Former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna constituted a three-member judicial in-house committee to examine the allegations. The committee reportedly reviewed CCTV footage and examined 55 witnesses.
- The committee concluded that Justice Varma had “tacit and active control” over the room where the cash was stored.
- Later, the Supreme Court dismissed Justice Varma’s petition challenging the validity of the internal inquiry, and the Collegium transferred him to the Allahabad High Court.
After the findings of “serious misconduct,” 146 MPs across party lines signed a memorandum seeking his removal.
In August 2025, Speaker Om Birla admitted the motion and formed a formal three-member Statutory Inquiry Committee under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. Justice Varma challenged the Speaker’s authority to create the panel. In January 2026, the Supreme Court rejected his plea, allowing the inquiry to continue.
Earlier, On April 9, 2026, as the parliamentary inquiry was nearing completion, Justice Varma tendered his resignation to President Droupadi Murmu, effective immediately. He stepped away from proceedings, claiming he was not given basic fairness and that he was not allowed to cross-examine key witnesses.
After resigning, he reportedly surrendered judicial perks and revived his Bar Council enrolment to return to private practice as a lawyer.
Despite his resignation, the Statutory Inquiry Committee continued the proceedings ex parte, finalized its findings, and submitted its report to the Lok Sabha Speaker in May 2026. Birla plans to table it when the Monsoon Session begins.
A landmark 1978 Constitution Bench ruling holds that the resignation of a High Court judge is a unilateral constitutional act it becomes effective immediately without requiring formal acceptance.
Legal experts argue that if the judge’s office is already vacant, then the core purpose of impeachment removal from office becomes impossible. Parliament cannot remove someone from a post they no longer hold.
Supporters of the inquiry argue that resignation cannot be treated as an easy way to avoid constitutional accountability. They also point out that the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 does not clearly say the inquiry must stop if the judge resigns.
They further argue that post-retirement outcomes may still depend on whether the judge is considered to have retired normally or was effectively “removed,” which makes it important for the parliamentary process to conclude.
ALSO READ: Impeachment Process: A Critical Look At Justice Shekhar Yadav And Justice Yashwant Varma
Avoiding an impeachment vote by resigning is not entirely new in India, but previous cases have not produced a fully settled legal outcome.
- Justice P.D. Dinakaran (2011): He resigned while an inquiry was ongoing, leading the Rajya Sabha Chairman to wind up the committee.
- Justice Soumitra Sen (2011): The Rajya Sabha voted for impeachment, but he resigned just before the Lok Sabha vote. The Lok Sabha then dropped the issue as infructuous, leaving a major legal question unresolved.
If Parliament debates and votes on the committee’s report, it will likely be challenged in the Supreme Court.
The final decision will clarify whether resignation provides complete immunity from parliamentary censure or whether Parliament can still act against alleged misconduct even after resignation.
On 15th March Justice Yashwant Varma’s official apartment in the 30-Tughlak Crescent neighborhood of Delhi caught fire. Authorities discovered massive piles of burned money in his home’s storeroom after the fire was put out. The inquiry report, which India Today was able to see, stated that the money was strewn all over the room and reached a height of 1.5 feet.
According to the report, 17 people including his daughter spent the night of March 14–15 at his home. Justice Varma and his family were in “covert” and “active” management of the storeroom where the cash was discovered. Additionally, because the storage was kept secured and only the judge and his immediate family could enter, the panel disregarded the involvement of any outsiders.
There was cash in the storeroom which led the fire worse. the staff of Justice Varma tried to remove the burnt cash. In addition to that personal secretary of Justice Varma, Rahendar Singh Karki was the first person to inform Justice about the fire and he kept calling him all night to give updates.
Instead of giving proper explanation he gave a flat denial and called it a “consiracy“. But the committee did not accept this explanation.