In the Justice Yashwant Varma row, lawyers have approached the Supreme Court seeking a review of the earlier ruling. They stated that “criminal law still not set in motion, bribe givers, bribe takers, fixers and brokers remain unscathed.”
In the cash discovery row, a Supreme Court-appointed panel stated the storeroom where burnt cash was found was “under active control of Justice Varma and family,” raising serious questions about the Allahabad High Court judge’s role.
The Allahabad High Court Bar Association President called the impeachment move against Justice Yashwant Varma “the victory of the public,” saying it restores trust in the judiciary and shows that people’s voices have truly been heard.
Vice President Dhankhar questioned the delay in FIR in the judge cash case, saying, “Who are the bigger sharks?” He noted the Supreme Court has acted but must now address legacy issues from the 1990s.
Today, On 19th May, Supreme Court to hear petition demanding FIR against Justice Yashwant Varma in alleged cash scandal. The plea seeks criminal action in connection with the controversy, raising serious questions over judicial conduct and accountability.
The Supreme Court of India declined to urgently hear a petition seeking an FIR against Judge Yashwant Varma over credible cash row claims. Petitioners stress the necessity of criminal proceedings, citing a favorable inquiry outcome. Despite the former Chief Justice’s recommendation for resignation, the Judge has not stepped down, intensifying the call for accountability.
Justice Madhav Jamdar of the Bombay High Court has initiated a police investigation into suspicious calls made to his wife, purportedly aimed at framing him after he issued strict orders against two lawyers. The inquiry, ordered due to concerns over judicial interference, will assess whether these calls were intended to intimidate him.
Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara petitioned the Supreme Court to reform the current collegium system and senior advocate designations, alleging favoritism and elitism. Despite being cautioned by the Chief Justice, he argued that the system unfairly benefits a small elite, violating constitutional rights. The petitioners demand an overhaul for enhanced judicial fairness and equality.
Students have raised concerns about alleged irregularities in the NEET-UG exam, prompting a plea to involve the CBI and ED. They argue that the ED is obligated to investigate and punish those responsible for the question paper leaks under the PMLA and IT Act. The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for July 8.
The Supreme Court rejected a petition to abolish the Collegium system and reinstate the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). The Registrar emphasized the system’s legality, citied previous judgments, and deemed the petition repetitive and burdensome to the court. The rejected plea criticized the Collegium system and the 2015 judgment, which struck down the NJAC mechanism.
