Following the conclusion of an in-house inquiry into allegations regarding the recovery of unaccounted cash from the official premises of Justice Yashwant Varma, a fresh writ petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) and initiation of a criminal investigation.
The petition, filed by Advocate Mathews Nedumpara and three others, comes in the wake of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) forwarding the inquiry report to the President of India and the Prime Minister. The report, compiled by a three-judge committee constituted on March 22, reportedly found the allegations to be prima facie true.
Background of Allegations
The case stems from the discovery of a large quantity of alleged illicit cash during a firefighting operation in the store-room of the out-house attached to Justice Varma’s official residence. At the time, Justice Varma was serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court. Following the emergence of this controversy, he was transferred to the Allahabad High Court — his parent High Court — and subsequently divested of judicial work by direction of the CJI.
Previous Writ and Dismissal
In March, the petitioners had previously approached the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutionality of the in-house inquiry process and seeking immediate criminal investigation. However, the Court declined to entertain the petition, stating it was premature. The bench observed that, “at this stage, it will not be appropriate to entertain this Writ Petition,” and advised the petitioners to await the outcome of the inquiry.
Petitioners Seek Reconsideration of Legal Precedents
The petitioners now argue that, with the in-house inquiry having concluded and its findings forwarded to constitutional authorities, the matter warrants the registration of an FIR and full-fledged police investigation.
They have also questioned the legal precedent laid down in K. Veeraswami v. Union of India, which mandates prior permission from the Chief Justice of India before lodging an FIR against a sitting judge. The petition terms this requirement as “contrary to the law of the land” and in need of urgent judicial reconsideration.
“The case at hand is an open and shut case. It is a case of holding black money accumulated by selling justice,” the petition states. It further notes that even under Justice Varma’s own explanation, the absence of an FIR raises serious questions. “Filing an FIR even belatedly is absolutely necessary to enable the police to investigate the conspiracy aspect,” the plea adds.
Call for Criminal Prosecution Beyond Impeachment
The petitioners have stressed that mere impeachment or removal from office would not suffice. “When it is a judge — the defender of justice — who is himself the accused, then it is no ordinary offence. The gravity is far greater and so must be the punishment,” the petition argues.
They further submit that a judicial inquiry alone cannot uncover the full extent of the alleged wrongdoing. A police-led investigation, they say, is vital to determine the involvement of other parties, including alleged bribe-givers and the judgments that may have been influenced.
As of now, there has been no official confirmation regarding the content of the in-house report or further action by constitutional authorities. The Supreme Court is yet to list the fresh petition for hearing.
