Justice Yashwant Varma has moved the Supreme Court, calling his impeachment move a “conspiracy” and directly blaming former CJI Khanna, saying, “Ex-CJI Khanna was wrong, the entire sequence of events a conspiracy.”
Justice Yashwant Varma approached the Supreme Court to contest the findings of an in-house inquiry panel that recommended his impeachment. This controversy began in March when burnt currency notes were discovered at his official residence in New Delhi.
In his petition, Justice Varma argued that the principles of natural justice were not upheld and that he was not given a fair opportunity to present his case. He also claimed that then-Supreme Court Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna denied him a personal hearing.
The fire incident at Varma’s residence led to the discovery of bags filled with cash in an outhouse while he was serving as a judge at the Delhi High Court.
The plea asserted that the committee’s process was preconceived and hurried, failing to provide Justice Varma with a sufficient opportunity to present his case.
The committee, which included Chief Justice Sheel Nagu from the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia from the Himachal High Court, and Justice Anu Sivaraman from the Karnataka High Court, investigated the allegations related to the discovery of cash at Justice Varma’s residence.
They commenced their investigation on March 25 and completed the report by May 3, which was subsequently submitted to then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna on May 4.
The report found the judge culpable, leading the CJI to forward it to the President while recommending Justice Varma’s impeachment.
Following this, he was transferred back to the Allahabad High Court, and an inquiry initiated by Khanna found him culpable.
Despite Varma’s denial of any wrongdoing, the Supreme Court-appointed committee concluded that he and his family had “covert or active control” over the storeroom where the cash was found, indicating misconduct serious enough to warrant his removal.
After Varma refused to resign, Khanna referred the matter to the President and the Prime Minister.
A leaked confidential judicial inquiry report revealed significant discrepancies between the testimonies of domestic staff and independent witnesses regarding the fire and the alleged burning of currency notes at Varma’s residence.
The internal inquiry, ordered by the Supreme Court, also highlighted major lapses in communication protocols and raised critical concerns regarding transparency, oversight, and judicial accountability.
According to the 64-page report submitted to Sanjiv Khanna on May 4, 2025, by a three-member panel consisting of Justices Sheel Nagu, GS Sandhawalia, and Anu Sivaraman, burnt cash was found in the storeroom of 30 Tughlak Crescent, Justice Varma’s official residence.
The committee determined, based on forensic and electronic evidence, that the currency was secretly removed in the early hours of March 15, just prior to the matter becoming public.
The inquiry also uncovered a concerning trend of uniformly exonerating statements from Justice Varma’s household staff. Many of these long-term employees, who came from his native district, claimed they had not witnessed any currency or suspicious activity, even during the fire.
The committee deemed their consistent denials as “not fully credible,” particularly when compared to accounts from third parties.
A fire broke out at Justice Varma’s home on the evening of March 14, during which unaccounted cash was inadvertently found by firefighters.
Also Read: Plea in Allahabad High Court: ‘Withhold Oath of Justice Yashwant Varma’
A video depicting the recovery of the burnt cash was reportedly shared by the Delhi Police Commissioner with the Chief Justice of the High Court.
At the time of the incident, Justice Varma and his wife were traveling in Madhya Pradesh, leaving only their daughter and elderly mother at home. On March 21, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) initiated an internal investigation into the allegations, appointing a three-member committee to carry out the inquiry.
Case Title: XXX v. Union of India, Diary No.38664/2025